EASP-5/19/Report

5th Plenary Meeting of the Eurasian Soil Partnership

Chisinau, Republic of Moldova October 30 – September 1, 2019

2

EASP-5/19/Report

5th Plenary Meeting of the Eurasian Soil Partnership

Chisinau, Republic of Moldova, October 30 – September 1, 2019

Report prepared by the Secretariats of the Eurasian Soil Partnership and the Global Soil

Partnership.

Chair: Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova (Uzbekistan)

Vice-chair: Mr. Iurie Mosoi (Moldova)

Regional facilitator: Ms. Natalia Rodriguez Eugenio (GSP secretariat)

EASP Secretariat (Russian Federation, Eurasian Center for Food Security of Lomonosov Moscow

State University):

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov - Executive Secretary

The following EASP Secretariat members took over the leadership for the pillars of action:

Mr. Alexey Sorokin (Pillar 1), Ms. Anna Kontoboytseva (Pillar 2), Ms. Maria Konyushkova (Pillar 3),

Mr. Oleg Golozubov (Pillar 4) and Ms. Olga Yakimenko (Pillar 5).

D i s c l a i m e r

The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the

United Nations (FAO), or of Lomonosov Moscow State University (MSU) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the

delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been

endorsed or recommended by FAO, or MSU in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not

necessarily reflect the views or policies of FAO, or MSU.

3

Table of Contents

List of Acronyms ............................................................................................................................................. 4

General description of the meeting ............................................................................................................... 5

1 Welcoming remarks and tour de table........................................................................................................ 6

2 GSP developments of regional interest (Natalia Rodriguez) ....................................................................... 6

3 EASP Work Progress .................................................................................................................................... 8

3.1 General report on EASP results for 2018-2019 (Gulchekhra Khasanklhanova) ................................... 8

3.1.1 Work Progress on Pillar 1 (Hakki Erdogan) .................................................................................. 11

3.1.2 Work Progress on Pillar 2 (Elena Sukhacheva) ............................................................................ 11

3.1.3 Work Progress on Pillar 3 (Svyatoslav Baliuk) ............................................................................. 12

3.1.4 Work Progress on Pillar 4 (Oleg Golozubov) ............................................................................... 14

3.1.5 Work Progress on Pillar 5 (Hukmatullo Akhmadov) .................................................................... 15

3.2 Interactions with the ESP to establish an effective RESOLAN (Hakki Erdogan) ................................. 16

3.3 Results on 5 Pillars discussion ............................................................................................................ 17

4 EASP Implementation Plan 2020-2023 discussion .................................................................................... 18

5 GEF and SSM – preparation of regional project ........................................................................................ 21

6 Relevant national and global initiatives .................................................................................................... 23

6.1. National activities .............................................................................................................................. 23

6.2 EASP contribution to global products (Pavel Krasilnikov) .................................................................. 27

6.3 Support to the promotion of SSM – GSP Phase II Results (Natalia Rodriguez) .................................. 28

6.4 EASP Synergies with other initiatives (Ronald Vargas)....................................................................... 29

6.5 Book on SSM in Eurasian region discussion (Pavel Krasilnikov) ......................................................... 30

7 EASP Implementation Plan 2020-2023 adoption and move forward ....................................................... 30

8 Formation of WGs on five Pillars and selecting WG Coordinators ............................................................ 31

Annex I – List of Participants ........................................................................................................................ 33

Annex II – Agenda ......................................................................................................................................... 34

Annex III – EASP Implementation plan ......................................................................................................... 36

Annex IV – EASP Working Groups ................................................................................................................ 43

Annex V – Draft contents of the book .......................................................................................................... 44

4

List of Acronyms

CA: Central Asia

CACILM : Central Asian Countries Initiative for Land Management

CD: Capacity Development

CIRCASA: Coordination of International Research Cooperation on Soil Carbon Sequestration in Agriculture

EASP: Eurasian Soil Partnership

EASIS: Eurasian Soil Information System

EC: European Commission

ECFS: Eurasian Center for Food Security of Lomonosov Moscow State University

EU: European Union

EUROSOLAN: Eurasian Soil Laboratory Network

FAO: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

Fertilizer Code: The International Code of Conduct for the Sustainable Use and Management of Fertilizers

NFP: National focal point

GEF: Global Environment Facility

GLOSIS: Global Soil Information System

GLOSOLAN: Global Soil Laboratory Network

GSOCmap: Global Soil Organic Carbon map

GSOCseq Programme: Global assessment of soil organic carbon sequestration potential Programme

GSOP: Global Symposium on Soil Pollution

GSP: Global Soil Partnership

ICARDA: International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas

ICBA: International Center for Biosaline Agriculture

INBS: International Network on Black Soils

INSAS: International Network of Salt-Affected Soils

ITPS: Intergovernmental Technical Panel on Soils

JRC: Joint Research Center of EC

LDN: Land Degradation Neutrality

LUS: Land use strategy

NGO: Non-governmental organization

RESOLAN: Regional European Soil Laboratory Network

RIP: Regional implementation plan

RSP: Regional Soil Partnership

R&D Platform: Global Soil R&D Platform

SDF: Soil Data Facility

SDG: Sustainable Development Goal

SIS: Soil Information System

SSM: sustainable soil management

SLM: sustainable land management

SWSR: Status of the World Soil Resources

VGSSM: Voluntary Guidelines for Sustainable Soil Management UNCBD: United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity

UNCCD: United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification

UNFCCC: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

WG: Working group

WOCAT: World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies

5

General description of the meeting

The 5th Plenary Meeting of the Eurasian Soil Partnership (EASP) took place on September 30 – October 1

2019 in Chisinau, Republic of Moldova. The meeting was jointly organized by the Secretariat of the Global

Soil Partnership (GSP), Eurasian Center for Food Security of Lomonosov Moscow State University, Institute

of Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Soil Protection named after Nicolae Dimo, the National Society of Soil

Scientists of the Republic of Moldova on the basis of the Moldavian State University with the support of the

Ministry of Agriculture, Regional Development and Environment of the Republic of Moldova. The event was

attended by representatives of Armenia, Belarus, the Republic of Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, the Russian

Federation, Tajikistan, Turkey, Ukraine and Uzbekistan, totally 28 participants (see Annex 1 – List of

Participants).

At the meeting, the results of the EASP activities on the 5 Pillars of the GSP for 2018-2019 were discussed,

the Regional Implementation Plan (RIR) for 2020-2023 was agreed and adopted, global and national

initiatives and the EASP contribution to support sustainable soil management (SSM), and next steps are

outlined. The program of the meeting is given in Annex 2.

The representative of the Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock of Turkey, and the Chair of European

Soil Partnership (ESP) Pillar 5 and of the EASP Pillar 1 Mr. Hakki Erdogan, made a presentation on the

interaction in the field of harmonization of analytical methods and measurement results between the ESP

and the EASP. Participants supported the previously proposed initiative on the creation of a regional

network of soil laboratories under the Global Soil Laboratory Network (GLOSOLAN) project. The

constitutive and first meeting of EUROSOLAN were held in Chisinau after the 5th Plenary EASP meeting

on October 2-4.

In the discussion of the RIP for 2020-2023 special attention was paid to the strategy of financial resource

mobilization. In particular, it was decided to participate in the preparation of the regional project of the

Global Environment Facility (GEF, stage 7) to maintain a balance between the conservation and use of soil

resources in the Eurasian region. The prospects for further EASP interaction with international

organizations and programs, such as the Regional Office for Central Asia and the Caucasus of the

International Center for Agricultural Research in Arid Regions (ICARDA), the World Bank, the World

Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies (WOCAT), the Coordination of International

Research Cooperation on Soil Carbon Sequestration in Agriculture (CIRCASA) and others were also

considered. Corrected EASP implementation plan for 2020-2023 presented in the table in Annex 3.

Participants were asked to nominate and agree on a list of Working Groups (WG) for each Pillar as soon as

possible after the meeting. Proposals were received by the GSP Secretariat from all EASP countries,

excluding Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan. The list of WGs members is given in Annex 4.

As a result of the meeting, the Chisinau Communiqué was adopted, where the commitments and intentions

of the members of the EASP for 2020-2023 were fixed.

After the 5th Plenary meeting the International Scientific Conference «East European Chernozems - 140

years after V.V. Dokuchaev» took place in Chisinau(October 2-3). The conference was organized by the

Institute of Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Soil Protection named after Nicolae Dimo, the National Society

of Soil Scientists of the Republic of Moldova and the Moldavian State University with the support of GSP

FAO and International Network on Black Soils (INBS). The event was attended by over 100 participants

from 24 countries. Within the framework of the conference, field excursions to the profiles of Chernozems

6

which were studied by V.V. Dokuchaev, as well as to the research long-term field experimental station of

the Institute of Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Soil Protection named after Nicolae Dimo were held.

The 2nd Meeting of the INBS, was also took place after the conference on October 4 in Chisinau.

Thus, the 5th Plenary meeting of the EASP was held along with other important events within the

framework of the GSP.

1 Welcoming remarks and tour de table

The event began with welcoming remarks by Mr. Mihai Lezanu, Dean of the Faculty of Biology and Soil

Science of the Moldavian State University, within the walls of which the meeting was held.

Then the meeting was welcomed by Prof. Gheorghe Jigău, President of the National Society of Soil

Scientists of the Republic of Moldova. Prof. Gheorghe Jigău told about the history of the development of

soil science in Moldova: from soil science classes as part of household courses to the first Congresses of soil

scientists in Chisinau. Prof. Gheorghe Jigueu drew attention to the various management decision mistakes

in the world practice made due to the fact that the role of soils was not taken into account. Thus, in the

discussions on climate change, the influence of soil cover on climate is often not taken into account. The

speaker urged the participants to recognize the responsibility for notifying decision makers about the

regulatory function of soils.

Ms. Natalia Rodriguez Eugenio, welcomed participants on behalf of the GSP Secretariat, expressed

gratitude to the leadership of the Institute of Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Soil Protection named after

Nicolae Dimo for organizing the meeting and outlined some significant results of the EASP for 2017-2019,

such as:

• Strengthening cooperation and capacity development (CD) in the field of SSM;

• Publication of the Handbook for saline soil management (FAO, 2017);

• Contribution to the creation of the Global Soil Organic Carbon map (FAO, 2017).

Then, Dr. Iurie Moshoi, Director of the Institute of Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Soil Protection named

after Nicolae Dimo, delivered a welcoming speech. Dr. Iurie Moshoy thanked colleagues for the

participation and invited everyone to introduce themselves. The list of attendees is given in Annex 1. Also,

Dr. Iurie Moshoy highlighted the program of soil science related events in Chisinau for the week from

September 30 to October 1.

2 GSP developments of regional interest (Natalia Rodriguez)

Ms. Natalia Rodriguez presented a report on the activities of the GSP in 2019 and on actions that are of

interest and recommended for the implementation of the GSP goals for each Pillar in the Eurasian region.

Presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Soils2012/general-report-on-the-activities-of-the-eurasian-soil-

partnership-easp-in-2017-2019 (English).

Pillar 1: Promote sustainable management of soil resources for soil protection, conservation and

sustainable productivity.

Action 1: Implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines for Sustainable Soil Management (VGSSM) at the

national level. Main proposed approach: organization of national multi-stakeholder workshops. Ms. Natalia

Rodriguez exemplified such workshops and their positive results in Costa Rica and Thailand.

7

Action 2: Submit successful case studies on the implementation of SSM practices. Contact person in the

GSP Secretariat – Ms. Zineb Bazza.

Action 3: Disseminate the International Code of Conduct for the Sustainable Use and Management of

Fertilizers (Fertilizer Code) at the national and regional level.

Action 4: Implement the principles of the Fertilizer Code at the national level. The GSP Secretariat is ready

to support these activities. Contact person in the GSP Secretariat on Activities 3 and 4 – Ms. Zineb Bazza.

Action 5: for those countries in which there are black soil – to join the INBS. Contact person in the GSP

Secretariat – Mr. Yuxin Tong.

Action 6: for those countries in which there are salt-affected soils – to join the INSAS. Contact person in the

GSP Secretariat – Ms. Zineb Bazza.

Pillar 2: Encourage investment, technical cooperation, policy, education awareness and extension in soil.

Action 7: Interest in establishing the “Soil Doctors” Programme on promoting the establishment of a

farmer-to-farmer training system for CD of smallholder farmers on the practice of SSM in of EASP countries.

Contact person in the GSP Secretariat – Ms. Zineb Bazza.

Action 8: contribution of Soil Legislation information to country profiles of FAOLEX database. Inventory of

the country’s profile in the on national legislation, policies and agreements related to SSM. Updating the

database with such documents.

Action 9: Spread the voice on the existence of the SoilEx platform and use it to promote the

endorsement/review of soil-related national policies.

Contact person in the GSP Secretariat on Activities 8 and 9 – Ms. Natalia Rodriguez.

Pillar 3: Promote targeted soil research and development focusing on identified gaps, priorities and

synergies with related productive, environmental and social development actions.

Action 10: Assist the GSP Secretariat developing the Global Soil Research and Development (R&D) Platform.

Action 11: compiling data to feed the R&D platform.

Contact person in the GSP Secretariat on Activities 10 and 11 – Ms. Natalia Rodriguez.

Action 12: Experts on soils with high content of Soil Organic Carbon (SOC) to contribute to regional chapters

of the report on identifying and compiling management practices and Land use strategies (LUS) that

promote the preservation and/or enhancement of SOC stocks.

Action 13: Develop/improve national SOC maps and participate in the Global assessment of soil organic

carbon sequestration potential (GSOCseq) Program.

Action 14: Promotion of more ambitious contributions at the national level, as well as including the soil in

the mechanism for trading greenhouse gas emission quotas.

Contact person in the GSP Secretariat on Activities 12, 13 и 14 – Ms. Rosa Cuevas.

Action 15: Respond to the questionnaire and participate in the regional workshops/discussions on the

assessment of the global status and regional trends of soil pollution. Contact person in the GSP Secretariat–

Ms. Natalia Rodriguez.

Action 16: Nominate country expert(s) on soil erosion. Contact person in the GSP Secretariat– Ms. Clara

Lefèvre

Pillar 4: Enhance the quantity and quality of soil data and information: data collection (generation),

analysis, validation, reporting, monitoring and integration with other disciplines.

National inputs in Global Soil Information System (GLOSIS)

Action 17: Update/develop SOCmap.

Action 18: Nominate expert(s) on soil salinity mapping.

Action 19: Initiate the procedure to develop country SIS – identify all relevant institutions in the country.

8

Contact persons in the GSP Secretariat on Activities 17, 18 и 19: Yusuf Yigini and Kostiantyn Viatkin.

Pillar 5: Harmonization of methods, measurements and indicators for the sustainable management and

protection of soil resources.

An active regional Pillar 5 WG is needed to support soil information system building and exchange of

harmonized data.

Action 20: nominate national reference laboratories.

Action 21: spread the voice on EUROSOLAN and support your national reference laboratories in establishing

National Soil Laboratory Networks.

Contact person in the GSP Secretariat on Activities 20 и 21 – Ms. Rosa Cuevas.

At the end of her report, Ms. Natalia Rodriguez noted that better communication between the GSP

Secretariat and the EASP Secretariat and with the NFPs needed to be informed of needs and progress.

Discussion.

In the discussion after the presentation by Ms. Natalia Rodriguez, particular attention was paid to the

process of creating the soil erosion map. Participants agreed that the primary task is to identify risk zones

and then develop separate maps for water and wind erosion depending on soil treatment. After the

meeting, recommendations will be adopted. Perhaps the next step will be to create a map of

recommended land reclamation activities.

Mr. Iurie Moshoi raised the question of how to map medium-eroded soils on slopes. It is still not clear what

is considered eroded soil, and what is underdeveloped? It was also noted the need to attract specialists in

the field of engineering hydrology and geohydrology to prepare actual recommendations on the removal

of water from the slopes in order to prevent erosion.

Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: the issue of erosion is too complex, a shortened profile is not only the result of

washing down, but also the result of xeromorphism. The extent of erosion is overestimated.

Mr. Arkadiy Levin brought up the question: if countries can count on financial support in translating

documents, such as the Fertilizer Code, into Ukrainian? Ms. Natalia Rodriguez replied that the translation of

the Fertilizer code into the national languages should be done by countries themselves, supposedly with

the involvement of commercial companies.

3 EASP Work Progress

3.1 General report on EASP results for 2018-2019 (Gulchekhra Khasanklhanova)

General report on activities and their results during 2018-2019 was presented by Chair of EASP

Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova.

Presentation: https://speakerdeck.com/kontoboytseva/session-2-general-report-gulchekhra-

khasankhanova (English).

First of all, Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova reminded that the Eurasian subregional partnership includes 13

countries with significant experience in soil science. In 2017, the 4th Plenary meeting of the EASP was held

in Tashkent, in which representatives of 12 countries participated (all partnership countries, with the

exception of Turkmenistan) and the results of work for 2016-2017 were discussed. Following the meeting,

the Tashkent Communiqué and the updated RIP for 2018-2019 were adopted.

Further, Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova presented the results of the activities for the five Pillars, carried

out in accordance with the RIP renewed in Tashkent and the road map outlined there.

9

Over the past two years, much work has been done for CD and strengthen regional cooperation. Its main

results were:

1. Report on barriers to the implementation of SSM practices;

2. Review of national programs and legal documents aimed at implementing approaches and

technologies for SSM;

3. Analysis of the role of institutions in supporting and implementing long-term programs on SLM;

4. The selection of sites for testing and demonstrating best practices in SSM for local stakeholders

and decision makers.

The main results of the EASP on the 5 pillars.

Pillar 1:

• All countries are involved in activities and adhere to the recommendations of the VGSSM regarding

10 major threats to soils.

• Cooperation has been established or successful continued with international organizations and

development institutions such as the World Bank, GEF, German Society for International Cooperation

(GIZ). Countries participate in international conventions and programs: the UN Convention to Combat

Desertification (UNCCD), the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (UN CBD) and the UN Framework

Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Turkey and Moldova are preparing national reports on the

neutral balance of land degradation (LDN), and national action plans to combat desertification have

been developed in Armenia, Belarus, Georgia and Kyrgyzstan. Work is planned under the second phase

of the Central Asian Countries Initiative for Land Management (CACILM 2) project.

• A study of human capital in soil science in Central Asia and the South Caucasus was conducted with

the support of the World Bank (Taking Stock of Human Capital in Soil Science for Central Asia and the

South Caucasus, 2018).

Pillar 2:

• The Eurasian Soil Portal is functioning; brochures, posters, calendars and animated products have

been published, which contribute to raising awareness and spreading knowledge about soils.

• A book on SSM and a guideline on sustainable land management (SLM) practices for agricultural

universities in Central Asia are being prepared for publication together with ICARDA.

• A variety of activities were organized as part of the World Soil Day campaign.

Pillar 3:

• The first round of small research grants for the study of saline soils was carried out and the second

round of research and applied projects in the field of salt-affected soils and the management of saline

soils and SOC management was announced.

• Collaboration has been established with international research programs, such as CIRCASA under the

EU “Horizon-2020” Program.

• Active participation of EASP soil scientists in the projects of the Russian Foundation for Basic

Research (RFBR), the Russian Science Foundation (RSF), etc. Projects on land degradation economics

(ELD) have appeared in the subject of grants from the RFBR.

Pillar 4:

• The Eurasian Soil Information System (EASIS) has been created and integrated with a general

methodology and software.

10

• Under the leadership of the EASP Secretariat, national Soil Data Facilities (SDF) have been created in

Russia, Moldova, Belarus and Azerbaijan. This work has become effective thanks to the close

collaboration of the Secretariat with the NFPs.

• Capacity building for the introduction of digital soil mapping, saline soil management and SOC

mapping with the participation of the EASP and GSP secretariats.

• Trainings on soil data management were conducted.

Pillar 5:

• EASP countries harmonize terminology, standards and protocols around the world;

• EASP specialists were trained at the GSP workshop on harmonization of laboratory soil research methods

(GLOSOLAN) in Rome (October 31 to November 2, 2017), in order to facilitate the transfer of knowledge,

skills and CD of EASP institutions.

Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova noted in her report that many results have been achieved due to the fact

that the governments of the countries have realized the importance of SSM.

Discussion.

Mr. Nikolai Tsibulko: Is GSOC map activity ongoing now? Is it possible to get financing for this work for

Belarus? How to get additional financing? Making a map for the whole country for $ 2-3 thousand is not

possible. How can we get larger grants?

Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: Ukraine received funding under the first grants of GSP. Belarus chose

another topic on the assessment of soil quality. Scientists should value the adaptation of new methods and

approaches by FAO; FAO is not a donor and it should not finance national projects. FAO will assist in

methodological support.

Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: international support is important for any country and institution. In Ukraine, 43

million hectares of agricultural land. A map with a 1*1 km grid is not suitable for monitoring changes in

carbon content; maps of larger scales are needed.

Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: we need to rely more on the role of national governments. For example,

when Uzbekistan submits an application to the UNFCCC Adaptation Fund, the state contribution to the

project is 50%. World Bank conducts investment programs, but they do not show examples in certain

regions, do not finance the whole country.

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: All studies in soil science require large investments, and it is obvious that no

international organization will take on funding. Our task, as partners, is to convince our governments. FAO

provides only methodological support or support for some case studies. You need to rely on your strength

and coordinate efforts. The GSP Secretariat receives a small amount of funds from FAO itself, but this is not

funding the Secretariat as a structure, it is a program to support a limited number of organizational

activities. Our activities are supported by special funds of the Russian Federation, they must be directed to

support very specific projects for the development of certain areas, for example, the creation of a soil

information system or harmonization of laboratories.

It is also necessary to consider and more actively use the opportunities of support from corporations. So,

PhosAgro sponsored the GLOSOLAN meeting. Small grants are an incentive for the development of certain

areas.

Among international funds, the GEF provides the most significant funds. The receipt and implementation of

a GEF grant is a rather complicated mechanism, and often there is a struggle between national

11

departments for the distribution of these funds. The Global Soil Carbon Map project was supported by the

Melinda Gates Foundation, including due to the support of African countries. We have a unique region with

good human potential, a strong school and traditions of soil science and a general educational level of the

population, as well as the experience of long-terms activity of agrochemical services. Therefore, we are in a

winning position, but we must work, first of all, with the country's government.

Mr. Iurie Moshoi: Concerning fundraising. Since Moldova joined the activities of the EASP 3-4 years ago, we

have been eating to establish communication with the government, but it doesn’t work out very well.. But

the last 2 years we have been working on case studies. We found interesting responsiveness on the part of

companies and agricultural holdings, for example, Uralchem and the Quality platform. We have an erosion

research station, and we work closely with them.

In the current state of things, it is possible to train specialists in Moldova only in partnership with the

Institute of Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Soil Protection named after Nicolae Dimo.

After the report of Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova, the heads of directions presented in more detail the

results of activities for each Pillar for 2018-2019.

3.1.1 Work Progress on Pillar 1 (Hakki Erdogan)

Презентация: https://speakerdeck.com/kontoboytseva/5th-easp-meeting-session-2-pillar-1-report-by-

hakki-emrah-erdogan (на английском языке).

Mr. Hakki Erdogan emphasized at the beginning of his report that during the formation of the Pillars of the

GSP, it was suggested that the activities of all the pillars would be aimed mainly at the implementation of

Pillar 1. Thus, the implementation of SSM is the main activity in the RIP of the EASP.

As part of the FAO Technical Cooperation Program, a Country Action Plan on SSM in Turkey was prepared in

2019.

The main task for the EASP countries in the area of implementation of SSM is the search for financing. GEF

colleagues at FAO will talk more about GEF mechanisms and the benefits of applying from several

countries. Below I will talk about working on an application for a joint project that will be overseen by

Turkey.. At the time of the meeting, a concept note and a proposal were prepared.

3.1.2 Work Progress on Pillar 2 (Elena Sukhacheva)

Presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Soils2012/report-on-pillar-2-activities-223461961 (English).

The information search and analysis on various programs and projects showed that in 2018-2019 there

were more activities to strengthen cooperation and disseminate knowledge in the field of soil science than

during the last stage (2016-2017). Perhaps this is due to the increase in activity after the campaign of the

International Year of Soils.

• The World Bank supported ECFS project on Taking Stock of Human Capital in Soil Science for

Central Asia and the South Caucasus (2018).

• “Strengthening Agricultural Infrastructure Services with the Context of Global Soil Partnership”

Project under FAO-Turkey Partnership Programme (March 2018).

• GEF and FAO started in 2018 large soil project “Integrated Natural Resources Management in

Degraded Landscapes in the Forest-Steppe and Steppe Zones of Ukraine”.

• Program of the Agriculture and rural communities of the European neighborhood development is

being implemented in Armenia

12

The report listed also the main international scientific and applied conferences and seminars held in the

EASP countries, including:

• 10th International Congress “Environment and Soil Resources Conservation” (Almaata, Kazakhstan,

October 17-19, 2018);

• Seminar of School of Conservative Agriculture at the Experimental Station of the Institute of

Pedology, Agrochemistry and Soil Protection "Nicolae Dimo", Ivancea, September 28, 2018,

• Conference «Increasing of soil fertility and application of fertilizers» took place in the Institute of

Soil Science and Agrochemistry (Minsk, 14th of February, 2019).

• Field Day in Kharkiv, Ukraine, 2019;

• Conferences in Russia: V.V Dokuchaev Soil Science Institute, Southern Federal University, MSU,

Kuban State Agrarian University, Vyatka state agricultural academy and many others.

Conferences and schools for young scientists were held: Minsk, Moscow (Russian State Agrarian University

- Moscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy, MSU), St. Petersburg (Central Museum of Soil Science named

after V.V. Dokuchaev).

Once again, Ms. Elena Sukhacheva emphasized the importance of informing politicians of the need to

support soil knowledge dissemination.

A variety of activities in the framework of the World Soil Day campaign took place in many EASP countries.

On a special way WSD was celebrated in Russia (in Moscow and St. Petersburg), where the ECFS, with the

support of the World Bank and the FAO Liaison Office for the Russian Federation, has been conducting the

International Scientific and Practical Conference on Food Security and Soil Science for 4 years in a row,

together with leading organizations in the field of soil science (above 100 people participate annually,

including representatives from Asia, Africa, North America). Ms. Elena Sukhacheva announced the

conference in Sochi.

Ms. Elena Sukhacheva noted in her report a lack of information in the Internet about activities in the field

of soil science, despite the large number of events held in the EASP countries.

A suggestion was made to step up efforts to promote knowledge on soils through the mass media and the

dissemination of information on the Internet. The need to engage new stakeholders and attract

commercial and non-profit organizations to strengthen technical cooperation and raise awareness on SSM

was also emphasized.

3.1.3 Work Progress on Pillar 3 (Svyatoslav Baliuk)

Presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Soils2012/report-on-pillar-3-activities (Russian).

Information on practically oriented research was requested from each EASP country, however, only

Armenia, Russia and Ukraine provided lists of projects. Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk noted the need to intensify

efforts to collect information.

Two rounds of small research grants. Following the results of the first round devoted to the study of salt-

affected soils, projects were selected and implemented in 5 EASP countries - Armenia, Belarus, Moldova,

Ukraine and Uzbekistan. Best articles on the results of small projects in Ukraine, Armenia and Belarus were

published in the journal Soil Science.

The second round (just announced at the time of the meeting) is dedicated to research and applied projects

in the field of soil salinity, assessment of the quality and monitoring of salt-affected soils, and management

of SOC.

13

Particularly important studies are conducted in Armenia in the field of improving the reclamation state of

the soils of the Ararat Valley in connection with a decrease in the groundwater level. Recommendations on

improving the use of water resources are given.

Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk drew particular attention in his report to the high interest in the interdisciplinary

competition of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research "Fundamental problems of soil research and soil

management in Russia". The competition received 266 applications, of which 46 projects were

recommended for financing a total amount of 600 million rubles for three years of project implementation

(≈10 million dollars). Projects are carried out in the following sections:

• The impact of global and regional climate change on the state of Eurasian soils in the past, present

and future

• Mechanisms of stabilization of soil organic matter at the molecular and ecosystem levels

• Technogenic and agrogenic soil pollution

• Creation of improved and artificial soils

• Study of the microbiome and metagenome of Russian soils as the basis for effective agriculture and

soil protection

• Digital farming, soil information systems, remote and geophysical methods for the study of soils

and soil cover

• ELD.

Also in Russia, an extensive list of research topics is presented: from soil biome research to innovative

developments in the use of drones. The studies are carried out as part of academic programs, federal

targeted programs, projects of the Innovation Promotion Fund, the Skolkovo Foundation and others.

Such topics as ELD and the legal framework for the soil protection have good prospects for developing.

There are examples of litigations on the soil protection and reclamation issues. Mr. Svyatosav Baliuk gave

an example of France, where from every ton of crop production a certain percentage is transferred for

researches.

Ukraine is implementing a project for the development and use of organic-mineral fertilizers. According to

Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk, this area is especially promising for SOC managing in Central Asia.

Soil mapping of the Danube river basin was carried out according to the SOTER method on a scale of 1:

250,000. The biggest problem is the coordination of the results obtained in the border areas.

In Ukraine, within the framework of the research program of the National Academy of Agricultural

Sciences, a research line “Soil Resources of Ukraine” has been created, in which 25 organizations

participate. Development of contaminated soils and other applied research.

Activities under the UNCCD. With the participation of the Institute of Soil Science and Agrochemistry

named after O.N. Sokolovsky developed a national action plan to achieve neutral degradation, approved by

the Cabinet of Ministers. One of the points of the plan is the stabilization of the content of organic matter

in the soil and its increase by 0.1% by 2030. A special issue is implementation monitoring using the

GSOCmap card and remote sensing.

Together with specialists from the Netherlands, Ukraine is working to promote methods of spectrometry

and plant nutrition diagnostics (Soil Cares Research Company).

Work is underway to create a National Soil Partnership.

Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk noted that work should be intensified to provide the results of research on the state

of soil resources for politicians.

14

Discussion.

Mr. Nikolay Tsybulko. How is it planned to increase SOC content by 0.1% by 2030?

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: How consistent are the figures with the “4 per 1000” initiative? The richer the soil

with carbon, the more difficult it is to build up reserves. When reclamating soils with a low content, it is

quite easy to significantly increase its content. Is Ukraine officially included in the 4 ppm program? Without

increasing the amount of organic fertilizers used, it is impossible. Can animal husbandry provide this? Are

you planning to use other methods, for example biochar?

Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: Ukraine has not yet entered the “4 per 1000” initiative. In 1990 Ukraine firstly start

the programme of reproduction of soil fertility: they applied 8 t / ha of organic fertilizers, 150 kg / ha of the

active substance NPK, 1.5 million ha were limed. In 1990, the livestock number was 25 million heads, now 4

million. Now in Ukraine, a livestock development program has been drawn up, but there is still no manure.

Poultry farming is developing effectively. However, before restoration of at least half of the cattle

population to ensure the necessary amount of organic fertilizers, the restoration of carbon content in soils

is possible only by changing the crop rotation system. The main issue is the establishment of a relationship

between land users and the state, which was lost after the collapse of the USSR.

Proposal from the participants: It is necessary to focus on green fertilizers (legumes winter + vetch). Solve

the issue of seed base.

3.1.4 Work Progress on Pillar 4 (Oleg Golozubov)

Presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Soils2012/report-on-pillar-4-activities (Russian).

Mr. Oleg Golozubov noted that the Pillar 4 WG is always in close cooperation with the Pillar 5 WG.

Over the past two years, much attention has been paid to the development of technical education, the

holding of practical seminars in the EASP countries and Russia. Mr. Oleg Golozubov presented a program of

courses on working with soil information. The courses were approved as a supplementary education

program, and certificates are given to successful participants. Among the key issues addressed in these

courses:

• Regional analogues of standards of the SQ ISO 28258 series - design and object models.

• Description scheme and Cookbook for setting standards

• Organization of the exchange of soil information in the international network of national soil

institutes;

• Typical information infrastructure of a regional SDFs;

• Methods of accumulation and storage of soil information and solving problems of harmonization of

soil data and others.

A training seminar on SIS and databases was conducted. The event was held by the staff of the ECFS I.O.

Alyabina and O.M. Golozubov on the basis of the Kyrgyz National Agrarian University named after

K.I. Scriabin (June 3-8, 2018).

In addition to the seminars, active work was carried out to determine the information richness of various

organizations.

A Country SIS Survey questionnaire was prepared and sent to the GSP Secretariat (about 60 questions)

regarding the readiness of GSP countries to create national SDFs. Information from SDFs in the Russian

Federation (agrochemical centers Rostov, Belgorod, Moscow, and data center of the Southern Federal

University) has been preliminarily collected.

15

For example, it became clear that in Kyrgyzstan the agrochemical station has the most actual and regular

information, and the Kyrgyz Research Agriculture Institute has the largest data archive. In 2018, after the

seminar on creating a SDF, four Kyrgyz organizations submitted an application to the Ministry of

Agriculture.

In Tashkent, on the basis of UZGIP, a SDF server with dedicated IP and remote access and work places for

GIS department specialists were deployed and primary information (maps, tables and statements of

agrochemical and land reclamation surveys) was collected.

The collaboration with colleagues from Moldova and Azerbaijan resulted in a multilingual (Russian, English,

Romanian, Azerbaijani) metadata database, an object model, and a software package for standardizing and

exchanging soil information Soil_ML_MiltyL. This software package is designed to create a structured

description of soils both by independent researchers for solving copyright problems, and by government

agencies - agrochemical centers, laboratories, expert organizations - for agricultural monitoring. The

software package was registered with the Joint Fund for Electronic Resources “Science and Education” of

the Russian Federation (July 7, 2019).

Mr. Oleg Golozubov handed the certificate to one of the authors of the standard – Mr. Iurii Rozloga.

At the end of the report, Mr. Oleg Golozubov outlined the key areas in which work will continue on Pillar 4,

and also discussed the issue of creating a two-level standard for the collection, storage and exchange of soil

information. Years of experience in organizing SDFs have shown that it is difficult for EASP countries to

switch directly to an international standard. Therefore, the meetings of the WG discussed the idea of

creating a country standard first, and then the transition to an international standard. Thus, it is planned to

operate in the GLOSIS system.

It is necessary to unite organizations at the level of interagency cooperation, since not a single organization,

not a single ministry has the entirety of soil data.

Mr. Oleg Golozubov noted at the end of the report: We are ready to disseminate the experience of

organizing interagency and territorial cooperation accumulated in Russia.

3.1.5 Work Progress on Pillar 5 (Hukmatullo Akhmadov)

Presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Soils2012/report-on-pillar-5-activities (Russian).

Mr. Hukmatullo Akhmadov noted that he also (as Mr. Baliuk) encountered a problem in collecting

information on the activities of the Pillar by country, as letters were left unanswered.

Until now, there is no agreement between the EASP countries in the terminology, methods and approaches

to the collection and processing of data, which makes it difficult to work in other Pillars. The

implementation of the other pillars depends on the most technical Pillar 5. At the same time, Mr.

Humkatullo noted that harmonization of methods at the regional level can be quite dangerous, because it

can lead to the development of regional systems that are different from each other and are inconsistent

with each other. Thus, at the regional and subregional level, an effort is needed to implement harmonized

approaches.

Mr. Hukmatullo Akhmadov made a special emphasis on the work in the field of harmonization of methods

for assessing and managing salt-affected soils. ECFS case studies featured cases on salt-affected soils.

Seminars and conferences on soil salinity were held.

The regional network of laboratories was created for harmonizing soil research. A system of interstate

standards for salt-affected and solonetzic soils, including the development of standards for sampling soils,

should be agreed upon.

16

Mr. Hukmatullo outlined the main activities for the Pillar, including activities within the framework of

GLOSOLAN. He also dwelled on the need to determine the criteria for soil degradation. Especially in

mountainous areas, where it is difficult to distinguish which soils are underdeveloped and which are

degraded. In these areas, one wrong step can lead to the destruction of the soil profile.

3.2 Interactions with the ESP to establish an effective RESOLAN (Hakki Erdogan)

Presentation: https://speakerdeck.com/kontoboytseva/5th-easp-meeting-session-2-eurosolan-activities-

by-hakki-emrah-erdogan (English).

Mr. Hakki Erdogan presented in detail the results of the ESP activities on Pillar 5. European soil laboratories

are united in a strong network and have extensive experience in cooperation and data harmonization.

Mr Hakki Erdogan talked about working with a partnership to establish a regional network of soil

laboratories (RESOLAN).

Harmonization of soil policies. Implementation plan includes actions on mapping, classification,

laboratories, procedures, soil information, indicators. These actions will allow the harmonization of

information. There is a list of laboratories responsible by country. There are 6 accredited laboratories in

Eurasian region. In Europe, much more. The main thing is that information is available to everyone on the

network. Efficiency: There is already data that is very helpful and can contribute to the development of the

network. There are policies regarding soil testing; there is high quality data. Opportunities in Europe. This

network is a good opportunity for data exchange between two regions - Europe and the Eurasian region.

Mr Hakki Erdogan presented the GLOSOLAN technical working group and it’s main tasks:

• Make soil analytical information comparable and interpretable between laboratories, countries,

and regions;

• Create a set of harmonized principles for harmonization;

• Improving quality assurance and control of soil analyzes;

• Facilitate the exchange of information and experience.

Examples of existing knowledge and experience in Europe were given, such as the EC LUCAS program,

standardization of soil laboratories according to the ISO system, high-quality and long-term soil analyzes

within the framework of the EC Common Agricultural Policy (EU CAP) program.

The creation of RESOLAN is an opportunity for the exchange of knowledge and experience between the EPP

and EASP member countries.

Discussion.

Svyatoslav Baliuk: What current work is going in the field of creating standard samples - an integral part of

the reference base?

Mr. Hakki Erdogan: Some laboratories have begun a ring test.

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: can standard samples really be standard? They need an expensive 3 year preparation,

including conducting multiple independent analyzes in different laboratories.

Ms. Natalia Rodriguez: the idea is that the first control tests showed that there were significant discrepancy

in results, that it is impossible to get the same result in different countries. Due to their high cost, they

were not standardized to ISO. GLOSOLAN partners must decide whether reference materials are useful or

not.

Mr. Iurie Moshoy: samples of soil subtypes were preserved for 25 years. There is another way for the

laboratories to work according to one method: to collect a sample of typical Chernozem, for example, and

17

conduct analyses in 50 laboratories. At EASP, we must have at least 10 accredited laboratories in order to

create these samples.

Mr. HukmatulloAkhmadov: first, the classification of soils needs to be unified.

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: few laboratories in Russia expressed a desire to participate EUROSOLAN. They ask

why this is necessary? The system of reference materials already exists and is functioning. The laboratory

asks why duplicate? We suggest expanding the range of indicators. The laboratories asked the Ministry of

Agriculture to lower the order, and the Ministry of Agriculture asked to bring letters from these

laboratories that they want to participate in this standardization. Intra-agency barriers make work difficult.

Oleg Golozubov: the 5th pillar was originally devoted to harmonization, as providing a unified semantic

model, a unified means for exchanging information. Almost all agrochemical laboratories (over 100) in

Russia are certified; the problem is that to ensure comparability, methods must be unified.

3.3 Results discussion

Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: regarding laboratories, I strongly support the initiative to create RESOLAN.

A compromise must be found in order to obtain several laboratories accredited by international standards.

Only one laboratory in Uzbekistan received such accreditation with the help of Turkey for only 4 types of

analyzes. If there are 6-8 laboratories in the EASP, and we can get unified analyzes, we can adjust the

classification. Strong partners like Turkey can train. The integration of scientists and laboratories is needed.

You need to take a report point. The soil cover has changed a lot. It is necessary to study either several

types of soils on the same instruments, or one type in several accredited laboratories.

Mr. Iurie Moshoy: It is not necessary to make a reference with the classification. For example, carbonate

enriched samples are analyzed according to their own standards; an reference sample can be bought. We

should talk not about the accuracy of a particular method, but about the correctness of the determination

according to the international standard ISO / IEC 17025. This is not relevant to the classification. Five years

ago, European methods for the determination of nitrogen in laboratories in Chisinau were adopted. Now

we are expanding the scope of accreditation. At present, in Moldova, fertilizer control is well established.

Mr. George Zhigau: The “Russian Chernozem” V.V. Dokuchaev said that the data presented in it cannot be

used to assess changes in the content of organic matter. From 2003 to 2015, I headed the Republican

Agrochemical Service: all attempts to improve the situation fail.

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov:

Pillar 5. Not so much attention was paid to the issue of harmonization of analytical methods for the

reporting period, we mostly followed by the GSP plan. First of all, we need to understand what objects we

work with, and to which group of objects we can extrapolate data. According to the USSR classification

(1977), for the study of Leached and Typical subtypes Cernozems, we must take two the samples, and

according to the FAO classification, this is one type of soil. At the moment, WRB remains the most

promising classification. On the basis of the museum, we should carry out a training seminar for WRB.

Pillar 4. The Secretariat represented by Oleg Golozubov does a lot, but I would like to see more results at

the country level. Currently, there are SDFs in Moldova, Belarus, Russia and Uzbekistan, but they do not

provide results.

Mr. Oleg Golozubov: there is experience and the presence of initiative groups. A big request to participants

of this meeting not to send directors and administrative staff to the upcoming meeting on Pillars 4 and 5 in

Rome, but to send technical specialists.

18

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: the whole initiative should come from partners. Not all countries have bilateral

interaction. It would be useful to involve Turkish specialists in the training and transfer of experience in

Georgia and Ukraine, for example. A lot of requests from national specialists for training.

Mr. Oleg Golozubov: several departments in the Russian Federation have already been merged.

Agrochemical centers need 1-2 months to make 500 cadastral passports of fertility. If you have a data

center, 3000 passports can be generated automatically in an hour.

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: GSP arose around the idea of a common information system.

Pillar 3. Countries are unevenly represented. Only Armenia and Russia sent information. The Scientific

Council at the RAS should collect this information, but this work is not ongoing.

Pillar 2. A museum is the best place to promote scientific knowledge. But Pillar 2 is not only about the

promotion of knowledge, but also about attracting investment and education. It is necessary to review the

curricula. It is also necessary to intensify activities for the conduct of continuing education courses, the

creation of consulting services.

I emphasize once again that all the Pillars are connected to each other.

Pillar 1. The most important, since everything else is needed for the SSM, to reduce degradation. In order to

put this into practice, a great deal of political will and resources are needed. The reports of work progress

show that insufficient efforts are being made.

In general, today's reports have identified a large number of gaps, that should become in the focus of

action for the next period.

Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: according to Pillar 1 there are problems, but what is being done on the

rest is the contribution to the Pillar 1. Turkey have been working hard and received the GEF project. Pillar 2:

all countries help in the preparation of price reporting. It requires reporting by target groups. But indicators

are not everywhere. It is necessary to monitor the organization of trainings and courses. Pillar 3 and 4 -

require contributions from participating countries.

Mr. Iurie Moshoy commented on Pillar 2 about land law. In Moldova, the Land Code cannot be approved;

the Law on Soils has not been approved since 1990. For example, the law prohibitive the irrigation of

Chernozem with water with a salinity of more than 1 g/l has is not adopted for a long time. It is necessary

to adopt the experience of other countries in the development of legislation.

Ms. Elena Sukhacheva: we are trying to adopt a law on the protection of soils in St. Petersburg. However,

we are faced with obstacles, as we intrude in the field of interests of builders. Pillar 5. I support the spread

of WRB based on the museum's collection. We can also continue the selection of monoliths for monitoring -

this will be an invaluable contribution for our future generations.

Mr. Maxim Dabakhov: regarding the law on soil protection. We have a sufficient normative base. There is a

methodology for assessing environmental damage. The Russian Federal Service for Veterinary and

Phytosanitary Surveillance uses these techniques. Soil disturbance during construction activity can be

tracked and punished with the help of GOSTs for control and reclamation.

4 EASP Implementation Plan 2020-2023 discussion

The EASP Secretariat prepared for the meeting in Chisinau a draft of the EASP RIP for 2020-2023 in the form

of a table with the main planned results, actions to achieve them, the responsible executors, timelines and

the preliminary budget. The RIP was based on a work plan for each of the five Pillars, developed by the GSP

and approved by the Intergovernmental Technical Panel on Soils (ITPS). When drawing up the plan, the

19

Secretariat proceeded from the experience of the previous stage, the results achieved, the ongoing projects

and the capabilities of the EASP.

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov invited those present to discuss in what types of activities presented at the beginning

of the meeting by Mr. Natalia Rodriguez in the report on the GSP activities to develop regional interests,

the EASP members can participate, and with what resources this will be carried out.

Ms. Maria Konyushkova opened the discussion as one of the 27 experts of the ITPS, which determines the

scientific policy of the GSP. Ms. Maria Konyushkova noted that all global initiatives in the regions face their

own specific barriers and are acquiring regional priorities. I expressed gratitude to Mr. Hakki Erdogan, who

took the initiative to prepare a regional joint application for a GEF grant. Ms. Maria Konyushkova suggested

discussing with NFPs the possibility of integrating efforts and including in the RIP activities for preparing an

application to the GEF and, if funds are received, implementation project work.

The representative of the EASP Secretariat, Ms. Anna Kontoboytseva, presented to the audience a draft of

the RIP item by item and made additions and corrections proposed by the participants.

Comments on Pillar 1.

Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk offered to plan two publications on SSM: one on theoretical issues, and the second - a

guide for practitioners. Ukraine would like to continue work in the field of disseminating the principles of

the Fertilizer code, as Ukrainian experts took an active part in its development, a large department for

agrochemical research operates in the Institute of Soil Science and Agrochemistry named after

A.N. Sokolovskiy. We prepared carbon stabilization proposals and are also ready to actively participate in

work on SOM management in the future.

Mr. Maxim Dabakhov recommended that the Russian federal state professional standard, soil scientist-

ecologist-agrochemist, be taken into account when developing a training course on SSM.

Mr. Hukmatullo Akhmadov suggested using the WOCAT database and not creating a regional knowledge

base on SSM, as suggested by the Secretariat. He emphasized that in recent years, WOCAT has greatly

simplified the questionnaire on the inclusion of practices.

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov explained that the Secretariat had begun work on creating a knowledge base on SSM

in temperate areas, following the example of the TempAg initiative.

Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova suggested including in the RIP the creation of national soil partnerships as

a result, and the first activity to achieve this result should be the identification of interested individuals and

organizations.

Regarding the knowledge base, Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova proposed systematizing agro-landscape

projects taking into account land use and climatic conditions, as well as providing information on the

economic assessment of SLM technologies.

Ms. Elena Sukhacheva supported the idea and drew attention to the need to focus on farmers.

Mr. Samvel Sahakyan expressed doubts about the need to create national partnerships, taking into account

the existence of the Society of Soil Scientists.

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov explained that the members of the Society of Soil Scientists are individual scientists,

professionals in a narrow research field who discuss mainly scientific issues, and the partnership does not

provide for individual membership. The purpose of the partnerships is the conservation of soil resources by

the joint efforts of various interested organizations - environmental NGOs, government departments,

20

business representatives, the food industry, i.e. all organizations interested in soil quality and increasing

soil productivity.

Comments on Pillar 2

Participants made a number of comments on the use of terminology in the field of regulatory

documentation.

It was decided to plan efforts to ensure the legal creation of advisory services and draw on the experience

of existing advisory services in Ukraine and Uzbekistan. In Uzbekistan, a extension service based in the

Tashkent State Agrarian University disseminates experience in greenhouses, freezers, fruit dryers, which

were deployed with the help of international donors. A government decree was issued to create advisory

services on the basis of all agricultural universities.

Ms. Natalia Rodriguez: the GSP plan includes the creation of training materials for different categories of

students in the framework of the EgSoils program.

Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk proposed the creation of regional educational and scientific centers on soil

protection.

Comments on Pillar 3.

Ms. Maria Konyushkova proposed expanding the scope of applied research from salinization and SOC

management to the 10 main soil threats identified in the VGSSM (soil erosion, loss of soil biodiversity and

others).

Ms. Natalia Rodriguez supported this idea, and recommended to relocate of INBS activities to Pillar 1.

Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk proposed to conduct research in the field of not only the economic efficiency of

introducing SSM practices, but on the integrated environmental-economic assessment. In Ukraine in the

field of soil erosion there is no official monitoring, no service currently does not monitor runoff and

washout of the topsoil. Also, Ukraine is waiting for proposals by the INBS to give special status to black

soils, which are degrading at an accelerated pace.

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: regarding the Atlas of Asian Soils, very few materials have been received so far.

Armenia was the first to provide the text. The preparation of the text and illustrations will take about two

more years. To publish the soil map of the RSFSR (V.M. Fridland, 1988), draft versions of the maps of

Central Asia and the South Caucasus were prepared. Subsequently, they were finalized at the V.V.

Dokuchaev Soil Science Institute, presented to the FAO, and now it remains to clarify the classification and

align the map along the border with other maps.

Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: in addition to conducting applied research on 10 threats, we need to turn

our activities towards mitigating the effects of climate change. If the climate change is taken into account in

the map set, then we will be able to cooperate with international climate initiatives and participate in GEF

climate projects.

Comments on Pillar 4.

Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: in Ukraine, a lot of organizational work has been done to create a SDF on the basis of

the Institute of Soil Science and Agrochemistry named after A.N. Sokolovsky, there is a resolution of the

National Academy of Agricultural Sciences.

Regarding salinization, I support the idea of creating an INSAS.

21

Mr. Oleg Golozubov: for each map (salinization, sequestration, erosion), it is necessary to determine the

responsible specialists from the countries as soon as possible). Each country can and should have several

SDFs.

The essence of Pillar 5 is the dissemination of knowledge of the standardized soil description language ML

in close connection with Pillar 4. A technical description of soil data is required.

Comments on Pillar 5.

Mr. Arkady Levin: the creation of correlation tables is necessary.

Mr. Umid Abdullaev: there are big problems with the lack of knowledge of English by young specialists.

Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: for the conversion of soil information into a digital format and the

successful functioning of SDFs, young specialists with soil education who can operate GIS programs and

preferably with knowledge of English are needed.

General comments throughout the Work plan.

Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: Our research and development should fit into the plans for economic and social

development of the regions and land management plans. In Soviet times, each field had its own technical

passport. After land reforms and significant fragmentation, these passports are no longer valid and need to

be updated. It was noted that we have great prospects in creating extension services and data centers

based on agrochemical services.

Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: it is necessary to more actively use international modelling tools in the

field of soil potential in various economic and climatic scenarios.

All comments were recorded and the full text of the RIR will be posted on the EASP page on the FAO

website and sent to the NFPs.

5 GEF and SSM – preparation of regional project

Г-н Эрнан Гонзалес, представил краткий доклад о механизмах распределения средств ГЭФ на

проекты в области УУПР в рамках реализации Конвенций ООН по окружающей среде.

Presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Soils2012/exploring-options-for-financing-sustainable-soil-

management-and-the-gef (English).

Currently, the GEF is implementing the seventh stage of financing (GEF-7), in which the countries of the

Eurasian region have already partially spent funds. In each country, the GEF national coordinator decides

which of the following areas — land degradation, climate change, biodiversity, chemical pollutants — can

be used. Mr. Hernan Gonzales outlined the topics of SSM projects in the framework of these areas, and

cited data as of September 27, 2019 on the balance of funds for projects in the area of land degradation.

The benefits of preparing a regional project were discussed. The GEF prefers to include SLM in selected

country projects that support the achievement of a neutral balance of land degradation (LDN).

Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: The more the government invests, the more the GEF will increase the next

amount. How related are the projects related to the forest and the achievement of the LDN? LDN is a

landscape approach. In Bukhara in particular, there is a great need for the establishment of forest shelter

belts. But for the forest project, forest belts are also important. Who will benefit?

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov asked Mr. Hakki Erdogan to talk about the planned GEF regional project and explain

what are the requirements for partnership on the contribution to the project application?

22

Mr. Hakki Erdogan presented a progress report on the preparation of a regional grant / project application

GEF7 titled «Conduct the balance between conservation and use of the soil resources in Eurasian agro-

production landscapes».

Presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Soils2012/discussion-of-the-gef7-regional-project-on-conduct-

the-balance-between-conservation-and-use-of-the-soil-resources-in-eurasian (English)

The aim of the project is to improve human wellbeing and environmental resilience through the

implementation of SSM and ensuring an enabling clean environment in the Eurasian region. Turkey has

prepared the first draft of the application by the time of the meeting.

Such regional project is needed to facilitate the implementation of the EASP RPR, establish synergies in soil

policies at the regional level, develop joint actions to solve a common problem (loss of soil ecosystem

functions), strengthen regional capacities and infrastructure to improve best practices in SSM to ensure

sustainable agriculture.

The main differences from other ongoing projects in the region are that they do not include all the

components related to soil management, such as the assessment of soil pollution, soil biodiversity, and

overall ecosystem functions of soils. The project proposes five results that intersect with the EASP RIR.

Mr. Hakki Erdogan announced the preliminary project budget in four areas: “land degradation”, “climate

change”, “biodiversity”, “chemical pollutants”. Turkey approved a mobilization of a total of 220,000 US

dollars from the GEF. Mr. Hakki Erdogan called for a discussion on the possibility of raising government

funds.

Discussion of the GEF Project

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: how much does this project overlap with current projects (a question for Mr. Hakki

Erdogan) and how great are the chances that the project will be supported?

Mr. Hakki Erdogan: it should be different from current activities, so we focus more on soil pollution, soil

biodiversity, and we should focus on developing a common soil management policy, and we need to

brainstorm during this meeting to find answers to this question.

Mr. Hernan Gonzales: as I have already mentioned, money is distributed between countries. If countries

want to invest in this project, they can. Ambition is high. We are talking about 2.5 million dollars between

13 countries. The region already has a large portfolio of international projects "on the ground". If this is

interesting to countries, we can organize a discussion at the GEF.

Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: can the GEF organize support for the EASP in its key areas of activity in

reaching out to other donors? If one of the results is the strengthening of the infrastructure, the technical

component (for example, the creation of laboratories), then this can be financed by the Adaptation Fund or

the Green Economy, but under the auspices of the GEF, so that there is an environmental component?

Mr. Hernan Gonzales: The GEF is not a quick fund, it is a long expensive process. It is necessary to move

gradually, to see which funds are available in which countries and in which thematic areas.

Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk said that Ukraine is ready to support this project.

Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: If 2-3 countries now support this project, the GEF will allocate an

additional $ 2 million for regional work. In, GEF funds remained only for the “climate” direction. The GEF

Climate Change focal point in Uzbekistan should study this project.

There is a negative experience with a large donor. There were problems with the CACILM project due to the

fact that local people do not always do their job fairly. We wanted to demonstrate our results on the

23

example of a small project, and when it was necessary to move on to a large project, the leadership

changed, and the project went to another department. There should be rules from donors who will carry

out the work on the project, which department. FAO technical support is need.

Mr. Ronald Vargas: we must do our best to make this project a reality. Implementing as many projects as

possible is our basic principle for implementing SLM.

It was decided that representatives of Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan contact the GEF

representatives in their countries and interact with Mr. Hakki Erdogan to prepare the application. It is

recommended to correct the project title.

It was decided to include in the RIP a separate paragraph the preparation of this project.

6 Relevant national and global initiatives

6.1 National activities

NFPs briefly presented key activities in the area of SLM in countries.

Armenia (Mr. Samvel Sahakyan). In the first half of 2019, a discussion began on a project under the

auspices of the GSP on the creation of the Armenian SIS. The Minister of Agriculture signed this project. The

following organizations are included in the project activity: the Ministry of Economy of the Republic of

Armenia, which now includes the Ministry of Agriculture, the Institute of Geodesy and Cartography

(provides cartographic data and technologies), the National Agrarian University of Armenia represented by

its unit - the Scientific Center for Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Land Reclamation named after

H. Petrosyan, CJSC “Melioration” (provides data on the status of groundwater and studies of saline soils),

agrochemical services (each year about 35,000 soil analyses for NPK, humus and other agrochemical

parameters). The GSP delegation led by Mr. Ronald Vargas visited these organizations and enlisted their

support in providing data for the creation of a national SIS. As part of the Pillar 5 activities, we attracted a

laboratory from Yerevan to participate here in Chisinau at the EUROSOLAN meeting and in further

harmonization activities.

Armenia was the only country that actively carried out the reclamation and use of soda saline soils, 5

thousand hectares of such soils were reclaimed. However, after the collapse of the USSR, funds were not

enough for practical development. Meliorants were received mainly from Russia and Ukraine. But

theoretical research continues to evolve. A non-contact reclamation method using sulfur dioxide was

created. However, while this is not economically viable, it is cheaper to use non-saline soils.

Russia (Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov). Despite the fact that Russia is a donor to the GSP, we have problems in the

activities of the EASP. As in other countries, we have a big problem with NFPs that are constantly changing,

and do not respond to requests from the Secretariat of the GSP. Therefore, I am acting as deputy NFP. In

many ways, the situation with financing soil work is much better than in other countries. We managed to

draw attention to soil problems. We are especially proud that we managed to organize an interdisciplinary

concurs of the RFBR on soils, but only 3 million euros were allocated for all projects. Moreover, the

competition was very large, more than 5 applications for a place, so we could not support everyone. Many

applications were submitted not by soil scientists, for example, developers of drones. This suggests that

understanding of the important role of soils has reached a large number of different specialists. So far, it

has not been possible to organize international regional projects.

Specialized institutions continue to operate: V.V. Dokuchaev Soil Science Institute, Institute of

Agrochemistry named after D.N. Pryanishnikov of RAS, Institute of Physical, Chemical and Biological

24

Problems of Soil Science of RAS, Institute of Soil Science and Agrochemistry of the Siberian Branch of RAS,

institutes in Ulan-Ude, Vladivostok and soil scientists at universities in Rostov-on-Don, Tomsk and many

other cities. Actively working the V.V. Dokuchaev Central Museum of Soil Science.

There are problems with education, since the Ministry of Science and Higher Education is on the path to

formalizing training programs and documents related to the educational sphere. Educational standards are

tied to professional standards as much as possible. As Mr. Maxim Dabakhov said, to date, a professional

standard “soil scientist” has been developed.

Interaction is being established with representatives of business and NGOs. For example, cooperation is

ongoing with the National Conservation Agriculture Movement (Mrs. Anna Kontoboytseva of the

Secretariat is responsible). In particular, this organization owned the idea of creating a database on SLM.

Regarding activities to harmonize soil laboratories within the framework of Pillar 5, there is still resistance

from the laboratories, negotiations are ongoing. According to WRB classification, no new steps have been

taken so far. The main problems are associated with difficulties in interacting with authorities and weak

interactions at the institutional level. There are problems of competition and parallel research.

Question from Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: how much does the current paradigm determined in relation to soil

formation correspond to the spirit of the times?

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: Factors-processes-properties-functions of soils (ecosystem services) remain the main

issues, and new directions should be more interdisciplinary. It is necessary to study the economic, social

aspects of SSM, issues of healthy nutrition.

Tajikistan (Mr. Hukmatullo Akhmadov). The same situation as in Russia, NFP also did not come, I fulfill his

duties. The scientific topics of the Institute of Soil Science coincide with the Pillars. Work is underway to

create a database of soil descriptions. The employee studied in India, but the work is very difficult, there is

not enough software and hardware.

The first major topic of Institute’s work is erosion processes (assessment methods, soil washout). We study

how erosion affects the humus horizon of mountain soils. During the USSR, a good map of soil erosion of

Tajikistan was made, which entered the Atlas of 54 maps based on satellite images. From time to time, we

make soil pits in the long-term field stations and update this map.

The second important topic is the study of salt-affected soils. Work continues on the reclamation of salt-

affected soils in the Vakhsh valley. The third important topic is the biologization of agriculture.

The main problems with financing and personnel. We send our bachelors to Novosibirsk and Kursk

(Institute for the Protection of Soils from Erosion), where they study at the expense of Russia.

Every year we hold World Soil Day at the Institute of Soil Science, we invite everyone. We do Doors Open

Days for students. By order of the Government, we hold conferences on soil erosion, salinization,

classification and soil genesis. Actively working with India on GIS technology.

Turkey (Mr. Hakki Erdogan). Over the past two years, the main activity has been carried out as part of the

FAO-Turkey Cooperation Program. We have developed a national action plan for SSM and the creation of

the SIS. Due to the large number of different institutions with a large amount of data, we had to do a lot of

coordination work. We also combined institutions to develop a unified soil management policy and land

25

use reform. We determined who will be responsible for which kind of activities within the framework of the

GSP. Thus, over the past 2 years, we have done a great job of organizing ourselves.

We support joint research activity with the Russian Federation. As part of UNCCD activities, two years ago a

map of soil erosion and a map of desertification were compiled. In accordance with the results of these

studies, a program of erosion control measures supported by the World Bank was developed.

Uzbekistan (Mr. Umid Ubdullaev). Presentation: https://speakerdeck.com/kontoboytseva/5th-easp-

meeting-session-4-uzbekistan-abdullaev (English).

Uzbekistan is the country most affected by climate change. The last two years there were very severe

drought, the summers were extremely hot, the temperature is almost the same day and night, and the

spring was rainy. This greatly affects the state of soils, water resources and agricultural development in

general. The area of irrigated soils in the country is 4.3 million ha. This is our wealth and we do not plan to

increase the area of rainfed agriculture. The most important task is updating the irrigation system.

With the advent of the new leadership of the country, a grandiose water management construction began.

We do not use our water limit, since water mainly passes in the winter, as a result of the last 3 years - the

strongest floods.

In the past two years, a number of important legal documents have been adopted that define the national

policy, strategy, programs and projects of SSM in Uzbekistan. Mr. Umid Ubdullaev presented a list of key

documents. About 15 laws and decrees aimed at the sustainable development of agriculture were adopted.

In addition, the work of the Tashkent Agrarian University, the biological and soil faculty of the National

University of Uzbekistan named after Mirzo Ulugbek was strengthened, the laboratory of the State

Committee of the Republic of Uzbekistan on geology and mineral resources was equipped with the latest

technology. Institute "UzGIP" creates its own laboratory.

Advisory centers have been created as part of the Tashkent Agrarian University and the National University

of Uzbekistan named after Mirzo Ulugbek, a separate consulting center has been created in Khorezm. A

number of state orders on the introduction of mineral and organic fertilizers have been issued. Great

attention to the use of soils by the government.

Investments have been made in the development of agriculture for a total amount of about 1 billion dollars

over the past 10 years. About 0.5 million hectares of dried up bottom of the Aral Sea was planted with

trees. About 3 million hectares is the new Aral Kum desert with a serious salt storm problem.

It was decided to introduce 200 thousand ha of drip irrigation each year. Studies have shown that in the

Hungry Steppe the general background of soil fertility has leveled off. To monitor the condition and fertility

of soils, district administrations are involved.

The problem of personnel as a whole in UzGIP is solved well, the higher school are connected with practive

at our institute, we have about 80 young employees. The question of salary is not worth it, because UzGIP

works completely on a contractual basis.

But the situation is not so good with soil scientists. Previously, there were state projects for the

comprehensive reconstruction of irrigated land, which included soil research. Now there are no such

orders, now farmers must order it, but they do not have the funds yet. We carried out several applied

projects under the roof of the FAO and showed clearly how to increase productivity with the help of simple

26

measures, such as a deep subsoiling, applying fertilizers in strictly defined terms. A farmers' school was

organized in which the farmers themselves shared their experiences. This work is leaded by universities.

Ukraine (Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk). Most of the projects that have been carried out in Ukraine over the past

two years have been highlighted in the Pillar 3 report. In Ukraine, there is one specialized Institute of Soil

Science and Agrochemistry named after A.N. Sokolovsky, and there are also departments of soil science at

agricultural universities across the country.

The main problems in the field of SSM in the country are as follows:

1. The materials of the last large-scale soil survey, which was carried out in 1957, correspond to

reality by only 30%. At present, a regulatory and methodological basis for re-examination of arable

area has been prepared, a nomenclature list of soils has been prepared, but so far there is no

funding.

2. The issue of organizing and conducting soil monitoring. The agrochemical certification system

should be transformed into a monitoring system, i.e. we must receive information in time and

space at stationary points.

3. Together with the GSP, a set of documents has been prepared for the creation of a SIS and SDF.

4. The draft State Soil Protection Program was submitted to the Government, but did not receive

support. We see the solution in creating the Soil Protection Fund.

5. The Ministry of Education and Science eliminated the specialty “soil science” from the classifier

of specialties. Only the specialty “agronomy” remained. We are looking for international classifiers

that can be referenced.

6. In connection with the land reform, new approaches have been prepared for soil rating and

normative monetary valuation of soils for both productive and environmental functions. This

technique is currently being considered in the Cabinet of Ministers. The course on lifting the

moratorium from the land market has been adopted; such documents are necessary.

These issues are heard at meetings of the Presidium of the NAAS. However, in recent years no funds have

been allocated for soil protection. The main task is to create a Soil Protection Fund. To date, the country is

not ready for the land market. We do not know soils value. But at the end of this year, a moratorium on the

sale of land should be lifted.

Kyrgyzstan (Mr. Jijitali Jumaliev). Presentation: https://speakerdeck.com/kontoboytseva/5th-easp-meeting-

session-4-kirgizia-report-jumaliev (in Russian).

The report provided general information on the state of the country's land fund and on the level of

agricultural development. According to the land report, the area of the Kyrgyz Republic is 1 million 995

thousand hectares, of which the area of agricultural land is 6.7 million hectares (about 34%). In 2015-2018,

there is a decrease in the area of arable land. Data were provided on the quality of the land.

Changes have been made to the Land Code. The government has developed a state irrigation program for

2017-2026, where measures were identified for the development of new irrigated land. There are problems

with equipping soil laboratories. Two soil laboratories operate: in Naryn and Bishkek. It is planned to create

mobile laboratories in each district. After the land reform, farmers began to use nitrogen fertilizers more.

Moldova (Mr. Gheorghe Jigau). He presented a report on the history of the school of Moldavian soil

science, which takes its roots from the University of Moldova and talked about modern ideas of Moldavian

soil scientists about the possibilities of introducing SSM. According to them, ecological and organic

27

agriculture did not justify itself in the territory of Moldova. He noted an increase in desertification

processes in Moldova.

6.2 EASP contribution to global products (Pavel Krasilnikov)

From the very beginning, the EASP participated in all international GSP global projects, starting with the

Status of the World's Soil Resources: Main Report (2015). We wrote our regional chapter quickly and

efficiently.

The EASP has taken part in a global soil pollution assessment initiative. FAO hosted the Global Pollution

Symposium, for which a review of diffuse and point pollution was prepared. We presented a report on the

general state of soil pollution in the Eurasian region. EASP countries provided information on legislation in

the field of soil pollution, on the current state and on measures to eliminate the consequences of pollution.

References to this chapter have appeared in international literature.

The EASP also participated in the preparation of the Global Soil Organic Carbon Map. Some countries

worked directly with the GSP and studied in Rome. Some countries worked through the EASP Secretariat.

Most countries have succeeded in making updated soil carbon maps. Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan did not

provide a map. The data was extrapolated and the quality turned out to be much worse. We currently have

several priorities: we must help these countries. According to Mr. Ronald Vargas, South Korea has begun

financing a project to create a SIS in Kyrgyzstan. Tajikistan is next in line and we must think how to help.

The EASP secretariat can help with training, but there should be local specialists with a minimum level of

training. Participation in these two initiatives is our main contribution to GSP projects.

We must think about how we can participate in the creation of the Global Erosion Map. Currently, soil

erosion specialists mainly work at the risk level. Most models calculate potential erosion. Maps reflecting

the real situation are much less common, such only occur at the local level. The situation with the dynamics

of erosion processes is very bad. A manual should be created that will give a unified methodology. This is a

big challenge that requires funding.

The task of the NFPs is to ensure that the collection and provision of information for global initiatives is

financially encouraged at the state level.

The salinity map is much less labor intensive. However, a lot of work is required to correlate data on water

extraction and electrical conductivity.

Ms. Natalia Rodriguez briefly repeated the report on 21 activities of the GSP and once again focused on

what contribution is needed from the EASP. Most initiatives require the identification of responsible

experts and organizations.

Commentary by Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: according to the assessment of soil pollution: The most unpleasant

thing is that in Ukraine Sanitary/Hygienic Norms and Regulations that determined maximum allowable

concentrations were cancelled. Russian colleagues have developed indicative maximum allowable

concentrations. A single methodological document is needed: either an international approach, or a

compilation of pollution assessment approaches adopted in the post-Soviet countries.

By erosion: specialists study only the potential ability of soils to erosion. Until we create a monitoring

network of sites to assess erosion dynamics, it will be difficult for us to make a global assessment. We need

to work out the methodological part. This is the most complex map, and decide what we will display on it.

On salinity: it is necessary to prepare two maps: one based on the water extract analyses and another - on

electrical conductivity.

28

Ms. Maria Konyushkova: In 2018, a specialist from the UAE estimated the relationship between electrical

conductivity and different salt extracts (1:10, 1:5 and 1:1) from 10 data sources. The correlation coefficient

strongly depends on the chemical composition, which was studied very well in the former Soviet Union

countries. There will be 4 categories in the map: non-saline, slightly-, medium- and highly saline. That is,

there will be no problems for a qualitative transition from a water extract to a degree of salinity.

Mr. Ronald Vargas: We are trying to create a Global Map of Soil Salinity, and we are preparing a concept

note and technical specification. There were a lot of different opinions, but we reached an understanding

and decided to use the available EU data. We will officially launch the INSAS at the meeting dedicated to

the 20th anniversary of the International Center for Biosaline Agriculture (ICBA) in Dubai in November

20191. The network should become a platform for developing saline soil management and mapping

approaches. You should have received a concept note, and give your comments as soon as possible, so that

we could present a consensus by November.

Thus, we have 3 activities on salt-affected soils:

1. Mapping. The GSP will conduct trainings on the mapping of saline soils, we will ask you to nominate

an expert from the country, who will then be able to manage this activity within the country.

2. Participation in the activities of the INSAS - discussion of technical issues, including mapping.

3. Global symposium on salt-affected soils in October 2020 in Uzbekistan.

This is a very important issue in the region, and we cannot manage without your expert opinion.

Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: The symposium in Uzbekistan will be a very global meeting. Inform us

about your developments, present the results of your research. There will be field tours.

Suggestions were also made to include technogenic salinization and to take into account the experience on

secondary salinization.

Mr. Ronald Vargas: Symposium will not be a scientific conference; this is a political event. A global action

plan for saline soil management should be developed by this time.

6.3 Support to the promotion of SSM – GSP Phase II Results (Natalia Rodriguez)

Ms. Natalia Rodriguez listed the main types of activities to promote SSM within the framework of GSP

projects carried out in conjunction with other international initiatives.

Presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Soils2012/report-on-the-implementation-of-the-project-

support-to-the-promotion-of-sustainable-soil-management-in-the-framework-of-the-global-soil-

partnership-phase-ii (English)

The amount of funding by the Russian Federation for the period from 01/06/2015 to 12/31/2018 amounted

to $ 1 million, for the period from 01/01/2019 to 12/31/2020 - $ 2 million.

Discussion and suggestions

Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: Considering the water-regulating role of peat soils, it is possible to raise the question

of creating an international guide for their use.

Mr. Samvel Sahakyan: the assessment of the activities of organizations and individual scientists is uneven.

Consider how to make a separate assessment.

1 By the moment this Report was prepared INSAS had been launched http://www.fao.org/global-soil-partnership/resources/highlights/detail/ru/c/1252161/

29

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: JRC planned the publication of the World Atlas of Peat Soils. Perhaps this idea will be

returned, and the GSP will make sense to join.

About the Williams Museum of Soil and Agriculture. If some funds are used to improve museum work,

that’s good. However, the museum collection cannot serve as the basis for GLOSIS, since there are no

geographical coordinates for monoliths.

Ms. Natalia Rodriguez: perhaps we will make more efforts to update the collection than to use materials for

databases.

Mr. Ivan Vasenev: the value of the Williams Museum lies in the fact that the collection set is very unique in

its location in landscapes and in terms of land use. Most monoliths do not have exact coordinates, but are

tied to the soil contours on maps of that time. Therefore, it is possible to study the analysis of ecological

functions. If it will be possible to create a digital museum, at least partially as in Wageningen with the

possibility of online demonstration, this will significantly expand the possibilities of popularizing soil

science.

6.4 EASP Synergies with other initiatives (Ronald Vargas)

Mr. Ronald Vargas highlighted the EASP's main points of interaction with other international initiatives in

the field of SSM.

Presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Soils2012/synergies-with-other-initiatives (English).

Interaction is carried out mainly through projects under the UN conventions. This is facilitated by the

activities of the ITPS. We have a joint work plan with the UNCCD. We are participating in the initiative on

LDN achievement by 2030. Recently, a call has been announced from the UNCCD to scientists and

politicians to join forces. We have our own agenda, and we must continue to adhere to it. All institutions

and conventions have their own agendas of interests and can do without GSP.

We are engaged in mapping of carbon sequestration potential, because we do not know we need this for

calculations. Soil recarbonization is what we need maps, calculations for, we are trying to cooperate, and

we need to identify regional platforms and initiatives with which we can cooperate. If you have any

thoughts with whom it would be worthwhile to establish a relationship on this issue - tell us now,

sometimes there may be unobvious decisions.

Mr. Ivan Vasenev: society underestimates the potential role of soils in carbon sequestration. It is easier to

map the sequestration potential using separate representative monitoring sites where research is being

conducted and maps that exist.

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: assessing the potential of soil sequestration in agriculture is the main objective of the

CIRCASA consortium - Coordination of International Research Cooperation on Soil Carbon Sequestration in

Agriculture, supported by the “Horizon-2020” project of the EC. CIRCASA is a science project that is

consistent with Pillar 3.

Experience in interaction with WHO has shown that this organization is very attentive to soils as a source of

healthy nutrition. And they negatively relate to organic farming - as act on the principle of equal access to

quality food.

Mr. Arkadiy Levin: there is the opportunity to interact with the International Cryosphere Initiative, which

includes the countries of Northern Europe, Canada and the USA, and holds seminars on the introduction of

SSM technologies in relation to the management of plant residues (do not burn straw).

30

Mr. Ronald Vargas: The UNFCCC recognizes that soil sequestration is one of the solutions. We are proposing

to establish a different set of indicators that can show the potential ability of soils to absorb and fix carbon

In September GSP presented soil sequestration at the UN Climate Change Summit in New York, so I’m sure

there will be investments. Pavel mentioned CIRCASA, this is a wonderful scientific project, but it is still not a

global initiative.

Among such soil threats as erosion, salinization, and sequestration, the latter is the most difficult to

calculate. We know the challenges and have a group of experts that leads research using machine learning,

and they will give us their thoughts on whether we can do this. We are in contact with CIRCASA and invited

them to be part of the working group.

We are in contact with the WHO on organizing a Global symposium on soil pollution. They have their own

resources, but we continue to look for other sources of funding.

Ms. Natalia Rodriguez: we contacted the European office of WHO, it is quite active in environment

pollution, mainly in soil pollution. In fact, they are involved in the global soil pollution assessment process.

6.5 Book on SSM in Eurasian region discussion (Pavel Krasilnikov)

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov said that the main product in the implementation of the VGSMM will be a book

prepared by a working group led by Mr. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova. The book is designed for different

stakeholders. The book will cover a wide range of issues related to SLM in the Eurasian region, including

social, economic and political aspects.

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov announced the contents of the book and suggested identifying experts and specialists

by chapter from different countries. The contents of the book are given in Annex 5.

Comments and suggestions on the book.

Mr. Ivan Vasenev: the consideration of climate change is going on as purely negative, but for Russia.

Ukraine and Belarus, it carries the potential to expand the agricultural zone, it is necessary to strengthen

the climate component.

In the section on management systems, it is necessary to consider the change in land use in various farming

systems.

Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: information and methodological and normative and methodological support of the

SSM implementation should be emphasized, along with scientific one.

The volume of the book is 25,000-46,000 words and it will contain colourful illustrations. A slight increase in

volume is possible. The book should be written before October 2020.

7 EASP Implementation Plan 2020-2023 adoption and move forward

All suggestions and comments on the RIR expressed by the participants during two days were taken into

account. Particular attention was paid to ensure that the EASP RPR is consistent with the GSP working plan.

Mr. Ronald Vargas noted that the huge scientific heritage accumulated in EASP countries, and institutions

continue to produce a large amount of data, but most do not use modern methods. The idea of the GSP is

to combine the work of all these institutions that produce information and harmonize it.

We do not have special funds to create a soil information system in Ukraine, as it happened in Armenia, but

we will help methodically and seek funds. As an option, the GEF project in Ukraine.

Mr. Ronald Vargas suggested expressing ideas on strengthening the EASP working network.

31

Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova: organize seminars to exchange experiences and present new specialists of

international level during EASP meetings. To expand the EASP, first of all, more people are needed in each

country.

Mr. Pavel Krasilnikov: to organize presentations and lectures for local students and specialists together with

EASP meetings. Attract administration representatives to EASP meetings.

To ensure that there are active NFPs. There are people who can work in partnership, but so far they have

not been able to convey to the country's leadership the importance of the EASP and achieve the

appointment of the NFP.

It is necessary to attract more youth. EASP gives young people opportunities for professional growth,

seeking funding.

Ms. Elena Sukhacheva: do interim reports every six months.

Mr. HukmatulloAkhmadov: to provide information to each other, respond to requests, communicate more.

Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk: the arrival of Ronald Vargas was a real event at the Institute in Kharkov. Young

people touched big things, participated in the compilation of global maps, which significantly improved the

moral and psychological climate in the institute.

If you look at the soil cover of EASP, this is a huge variety of soils and there should be different priorities for

their management.

We underestimate such a source of information as long-term stationary experiments. In Ukraine, 89 such

experiments. This is the only reliable source of information on soil evolution today, tied to a coordinate

system.

The experiments can be classified into 4 categories: 1) interstate (for example, Poltava experimental

station), 2) global, 3) regional and 4) local.

Also, studies on appraisal and degradation economics are still underdeveloped.

Mr. Jijitali Jumaliev: use modern means of communication for more regular communication (newsgroups).

8 Formation of WGs on five Pillars and election of WG Coordinators

Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova noted that over the past period the activity of the working groups on the

Pillars was insufficient. As Chairman of the EASP, Ms. Gulchekhra Khasankhanova announced the

nomination for the WGs members and coordinators of WGs for each pillar from the EASP Secretariat.

The composition of the working groups was decided to be approved after the meeting based on the results

of coordination with the candidates for each Pillar in each country.

Ms. Natalia Rodriguez, after meeting in Chisinau, sent inquiries to countries. As a result, by the end of

December 2019, the following countries submitted candidates: Armenia, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova,

Russia, Tajikistan, Turkey, Uzbekistan and Ukraine. The WGs members list is given in Annex 4.

During the voting the participants unanimously supported the candidacy of Mr. Iurii Rozloga as Chairman of

Pillar 4. The chairpersons of the remaining Pillars remained unchanged.

32

It was decided to appoint focal points from the EASP Secretariat for each Pillar:

Pillar 1: Mr. Alexey Sorokin

Pillar 2: Ms. Anna Kontoboytseva

Pillar 3: Ms. Maria Konyushkova

Pillar 4: Mr. Oleg Golozubov

Pillar 5: Ms. Olga Yakimenko.

As a result of the meeting, the Chisinau Communiqué was adopted, where the commitments and intentions

of the members of the EASP for 2020-2023 were fixed. Important intentions of the Chisinau communiqué

are:

• Promoting the implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines on Sustainable Soil Management and the

International Code of Conduct for the Sustainable Use and Management of Fertilizers in the EASP countries;

• Increasing investments in SSM, including supporting the national financial and thematic contribution to

the regional grant applications (GEF, EC and other financial mechanisms);

• Promoting the dissemination of knowledge on soils through the mass media, the World Soil Day

campaign, soil museums, and thematic classes for students at the national and regional levels;

• Development of a program of activities and events for interaction with agricultural producers in order to

identify gaps in knowledge and disseminate knowledge and experience;

• Conducting small research projects on SSM, as well as promoting the publication and dissemination of

research results.

Photos from the meeting are available on the Flickr storage FAO official account by the link.

33

Annex I – List of Participants

№ Имя Фамилия Страна Организация

1 Boris Aparin Russia V.V. Dokuchaev Central Museum of Soil Science, Saint-Petersburg State University

2 Umid Abdullaev Uzbekistan LLC «UzGIP»

3 Hukmatullo Ahmadov Tajikistan Academy of Agricultural Sciences

4 Svyatoslav Baliuk Ukraine Institute of Soil Science and Agrochemistry named after A.N. Sokolovskiy

5 Ivan Vasenev Russia Russian State Agrarian University - Moscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy

6 Ronald Vargas FAO GSP

7 Oleg Golozubov Russia ECFS

8 Hernán González FAO GEF Department, Climate and Biodiversity Division

9 Maksim Dabahov Russia Nizhny Novgorod Agricultural Academy

10 Jijitali Jumaliev Kyrgyzstan Ministry of Agriculture and Land Reclamation

11 Geogre Jigau Moldova Moldavian Society of Soil Scientists (Chairman), Moldavian State University

12 Anna Kontoboytseva Russia ECFS

13 Maria Konyushkova Russia ECFS

14 Pavel Krasilnikov Russia ECFS

15 Arkadiy Levin Ukraine Institute of Soil Science and Agrochemistry named after A.N. Sokolovskiy

16 Mihai Lezanu Moldova Faculty of biology and soil science of Moldavian State University

17 Nadejda Manyuk Uzbekistan LLC «UzGIP»

18 Iurie Moshoi Moldova Institute of Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Soil Protection named after Nicolae Dimo

19 Kristina Prokopyeva Russia ECFS

20 Natalia Rodriguez Eugenio

FAO GSP

21 Iurii Rozloga Moldova Institute of Soil Science, Agrochemistry and Soil Protection named after Nicolae Dimo

22 Samvel Sahakyan Armenia Soil Science, Melioration and Agrochemistry Scientific Center named after H. Petrosyan of National Agrarian University of Armenia

23 Alexey Sorokin Russia ECFS

24 Elena Sukhacheva Russia V.V. Dokuchaev Central Museum of Soil Science

25 Yuxin Tong FAO GSP

26 Gulchekhra Khasankhanova Uzbekistan LLC «UzGIP»

27 Nikolai Tsybulko Belarussia Institute of Soil Science and Agrochemistry of Academy of Science of the Republic of Belarus

28 Hakki Emrah Erdogan Turkey Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock

34

Annex II – Agenda

Fifth Eurasian Soil Partnership Plenary Meeting

30 September - 1 October 2019, Chişinău, Moldova

30 September 2019 Venue: State University of Moldova, Chişinău, Moldova

8:30 – 9:00 Registration

Session 1: Opening of the workshop and GSP overview Moderator: Gulchekhra Khasankhanova

9:00 – 09:30 Welcome and Opening Remarks EASP Chair Moldova Agriculture representative GSP Secretariat

9:30 – 10:30 GSP developments of regional interest GSP Secretariat

10:30 – 11:00 Coffee break

Session 2: EASP progress Moderator: Iurie Mosoi

11:00 – 11:30 General report on the activities of the Eurasian Soil Partnership (EASP) in 2017- 2019

EASP Chair

11:30 – 11:45 Report on Pillar 1 activities Hakki E. Erdogan

11:45 – 12:00 Report on Pillar 2 activities Elena Sukhacheva

12:00 – 12:15 Report on Pillar 3 activities Svyatoslav Baliuk

12:15 – 12:30 Report on Pillar 4 activities Oleg Golozubov

12:30 – 13:30 Lunch

13:30 – 13:45 Report on Pillar 5 activities Hukmatullo Ahmadov

13:45 – 14:00 Interactions with the ESP to establish an effective RESOLAN Hakki Emrah Erdogan (ESP Pillar 5 Chair)

14:00 – 15:00 Discussion on progress done and left behind EASP Secretariat

15:00 – 15:30 Coffee break / Group picture

Session 3: EASP implementation plan Moderator: Pavel Krasilnikov

15:00 – 17:00 Workplan 2020-2023: Discussion on the priorities and associated resource mobilization strategy

EASP Secretariat

17:00 – 18:00 Discussion of the GEF7 regional project on "Conduct the balance between conservation and use of the soil resources in Eurasian agro-production landscape"

Hakki Emrah

Erdogan

1 October 2019 Venue: State University of Moldova, Chişinău, Moldova

35

Session 4: Relevant national and global initiatives Moderator: Maria Konyushkova

8:30 – 10:30 Report of the relevant national activities National focal points

10:30 – 11:00 Coffee break

11:00 – 12:00 EASP contribution to global products EASP Secretariat

12:00 – 12:15 Report on the implementation of the project: Support to the promotion of sustainable soil management in the framework of the Global Soil Partnership: Phase II

GSP Secretariat

12:15 – 12:30 Synergies with other initiatives GSP Secretariat

12:30 – 13:30 Lunch

Session 5: EASP way forward Moderator: Ronald Vargas

13:30 – 14:15 Adoption of the revised Implementation Plan for the period 2020-2023

EASP Chair

14:15 – 14:45 Strategy to strengthen the EASP network. Role of national focal points and the need of nominating a technical alternate

EASP Secretariat

14:45 – 15:00 Election of the Pillars WG coordinators and appointment of national coordinators for the working groups of the five Pillars.

EASP Chair

15:00 – 15:30 Coffee break

Session 6: Agreements and closure of the workshop Moderator: Gulchekhra Khasankhanova

15:30-16:30 Discussion and adoption of the resolution of the meeting (Chişinău Communiqué)

16:30-17:00 Closing remarks GSP Secretariat

In collaboration with

36

Annex III – EASP Implementation plan

Output/Outcome Activity Description Executive Execution period (start-end)

Funding requirement and amount

Pillar 1: Promote sustainable management of soil resources for soil protection, conservation and sustainable productivity.

1.1. Implementation of Voluntary Guidelines for Sustainable Soil Management (VG SSM) in Eurasian region, including International Code of Conduct for the Sustainable Use and Management of Fertilizers (Fertilizer Code)

1.1.1.Preparation of a Concept Note (CN) on the implementation of the VG SSM and the Fertilizer Code in the EASP countries, including the compilation of a list of stakeholders. Choosing the Steering Organization from each country. Development of a guideline (scenario) for national multi-stakeholder workshops.

Working group (WG) Pillar 1

January – March 2020

EASP Secretariat funds for operating expenses (amount not determined)

1.1.2. Organizing of national multi-stakeholder workshops for VG SSM implementation.

Focal points (FPs)and Steering Organization from each country

April 2020 –2023 Inner funds of Steering organizations

1.1.3. Organizing the regional workshop on dissemination and implementation of VG SSM and Fertilizer Code

EASP Secretariat, Informational support: GSP Secretariat, Ms.Zineb Bazza

2020 38 000 $

1.1.4. Dissemination of proven practices for sustainable soil carbon management in the countries of the region based on the Technical Guidelines for Organic Soil Carbon Management prepared by ITPS, the principles of the RECSOIL project, in collaboration with the CIRCASA project.

EASP Secretariat WG Pillar 1

2020-2023 EASP and GSP Secretariats NA

1.2. Establishment of active working groups (WG) for all Pillars

1.2.1. Setting up the WG on each Pillar: nominating of minimum 5 experts from each country

FPs, GSP Secretariat, Natalia Rodrigues

January-February 2020

No special funds needed (NO)

1.3. Сreation of national soil partnerships

1.3.1. Preparation of the Concept notes on creation of the national soil partnerships, including an up-to-date list of stakeholders for the implementation of SSM practices: politicians and government representatives, farmers associations, NGOs.

EASP Secretariat, WG Pillar 1

May 2020 NO

1.4. Development of agro-ecological Knowledge database on SLM practices and their mapping and dissemination among land users

1.4.1. Analysis of the actually status, approaches and trends of different databases and sources of information on SLM / SSM. Choose WOCAT as main database.

WG Pillar 1 Coordination: EASP Secretariat, FPs.

January 2019 NO

1.4.2. Preparation of a CN on an inventory of successful projects, practices, methodologies, approaches, scientific and scientific-practical research in the field of SLM for various

EASP Secretariat, GSP Secretariat

February 2020 NO

37

landscape conditions and features and land use.

1.4.3. Inventory of projects in the field of SLM and mapping of successful practices with brief descriptions and contacts of local and regional practices used in EASP countries. Inventory and mapping will be carried out taking into account international requirements, standards, rules and guidelines of FAO, WOCAT and others.

EASP Secretariat, FPs. June – September 2020

Funds of EASP Secretariat NA

1.5. Participation in the Black Soils Network activities

1.5.1.Developing a regional chapter for the Report on assessing the international status of Black, clarification the evolution trends of Chernozem soils in natural landscapes and in agroecosystems in Eurasian Region.

WG Pillar 1 and 3, GSP Secretariat

First draft of the chapter - first half of 2020

Funds of Institutions NA

1.5.2. Intensification of actions to provide conservational landuse status to Chernozem soils.

1.5.3.Preparation and organization of the next Meeting on the Black Soils Network, according to the Kharbin Communique in Ukraine (Kharkiv)

GSP and EASP Secretariat, Institute of Soil Science and Agrochemistry named after A.N. Sokolovskiy

2020-2021 GSP and EASP Secretariat funds NA

1.6. Participation in the International Network of Salt-Affected Soils

1.6.1. Activities according to the agenda of the International Saline Soils Network and organization of Global Symposium on Salt-affected soils.

EASP and GSP Secretariats

2020 GSP Secretariats Funds NA

1.7. Preparation and publication of the book “Sustainable soil management in the Eurasian region”

1.7.1. Writing according to the developed content and publishing a book in Russian, which will cover a wide range of issues related to SSM in the Eurasian region, including social, economic and political aspects. The volume of the book is 25,000-46,000 words.

Coordination: EASP Chair, FPs

January 2020 – August 2020

EASP Secretariat 4 000$

1.8. Preparation of guidelines and teaching materials for SLM.

1.8.1. Development of guidelines on sustainable land management (SLM) practices in the Eurasian region in the context of climate change

EASP Secretariat January – March 2020

Financial from agreement between the EASP Secretariat and ICARDA

1.9. Creation of an inter-regional EASP network as a platform for adaptation and expansion of climate resilient approaches and technologies for SSM / SLM

1.9.1. Leading of consultations to develop the organizational structure, responsibilities and mechanisms of the distribution network. 1.9.2. Development and implementation of training modules and knowledge products for dissemination and replication. 1.9.3. Development of an action plan for training activities.

38

Pillar 2: Encourage investment, technical cooperation, policy, education awareness and extension in soil.

2.1. Assistance in increasing investments for SSM

2.1.1. Support for the development of concept documents and project proposals for the main financial mechanisms in the context of the priorities of the global agenda.

WG Pillar 2, FPs

2020-2023 NO

2.1.1.1. Preparation of the GEF7 regional project “Conduct the balance between conservation and use of the soil resources in Eurasian agro-production landscapes”

FPs of Kyrgyzstan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan

January-February 2020

2.1.2. Identify key investors to support the dissemination of SLM practices.

EASP Secretariat April 2020 November 2021

2.1.3. Conducting regional training and consultations for key stakeholders on approaches, policies and mechanisms of financing strategies for SLM-SLM

2021-2022

2.2. Promoting awareness among politics and decision makers about the importance of soils and their conservation. Participation in the adoption of legal documents on soil management and their protection at the national level.

2.2.1. Active participation in the development and adoption of legal documents related to soil (laws, standards and regulations on soil cultivation, the use of fertilizers and pesticides, documents encouraging conscientious land users, etc.). 2.2.2. Updating the FAOLEX database by new national legal documents on soils and disseminating the database tools among stakeholders.

FPs 2020-2023 NO

2.3. Training of specialists in the collection, analysis, processing and display of available soil data through in person and online learning and through knowledge extension services.

2.3.1. Training of specialists through the organization of in person and online seminars on soil data management (connection with the activities on Pillar 4, paragraph 4.1).

EASP Secretariat, WGs Pillar 2 and 4

2020-2023 EASP Secretariat funds NA

2.3.2. Assessing the potential of existing extension services (farmers' unions, scientific and educational centers, agrometeorological services, etc.) to provide advice and training to farmers and other target groups, taking into account the lessons learned and recommendations of the WB Social Capital Project and other EASP events.

WG Pillar 2 2020

2.3.3. Identification of effective and reliable services in the EASP countries as key centers of advisory services for the creation of a unified EASP advisory service system for technology transfer and extension of knowledges on SSM/SLM in collaboration and cooperation with ESP and GSP.

WG Pillar 2 2021

39

2.3.4. Transfer the experience of existing extension services (in Ukraine and Uzbekistan).

WG Pillar 2 2020-2022

2.3.5. Assessment of the potential of creation of regional permanent scientific-educational centers on salt effected soils management, conservation of black soils and economic of degradation.

WG Pillar 2, WG Pillar 3

2020

2.4. Publication of informational and popular scientific materials about soils.

2.4.1. Publication of popular scientific materials on the important role of soils in ensuring food and environmental security, including the creation of infographics on the economic benefits of applying SSM. 2.4.2. Distributing materials at the external related events and via the Internet to politicians, farmer communities, and other stakeholders. 2.4.3. Publication of World Soil Day campaign materials in national languages.

EASP Secretariat Every year in preparation for World Soil Day and as needed

EASP Secretariat 3 400 $ + involved funds

2.5. World Soil Day campaign. 2.4.1. Organization of World Soil Day events. 2.4.2. Exchange of contacts, distribution of campaign materials through regional and national professional networks. 2.4.3. Raising public awareness about the campaign of World Soil Day through the media, social networks.

EASP Secretariat FPs

October-December 2020-2023

EASP Secretariat 20 000 $

2.6. Re-organization and updating of the collection of the Williams Museum of Soil and Agriculture

Reorganization of the museum's collection in accordance with WRB and international standards for storing soil data, including digitizing collections and contribute this data into the Global Soil Information System (GLOSIS).

GSP Secretariat Williams Museum of Soil and Agriculture

2020-2021 GSP Secretariat 400 000 $

2.7. Strengthening communication and exchange of information between specialists whose activities are related to soil.

Organizing two regional seminars with the aim of enhancing the exchange of information, maintaining communication and involving new stakeholders.

EASP Secretariat

July 2020 November 2020

EASP Secretariat 25 000$

Pillar 3: Promote targeted soil research and development focusing on identified gaps, priorities and synergies with related productive, environmental and social development actions.

3.1. Participation in establishment of a Global Soil R&D Platform.

Reviewing the most important researches and practical studies and initiatives in the field of soil science and dissemination the information about them.

GSP and EASP Secretariats

2020-2023 Funds of GSP and EASP Secretariats

40

3.2. Conducting of Small Research Projects in the field of economic evaluation of the implementation of SSM, sustainable practices to reduce anthropogenic salinization and/or increase the soils organic carbon content and applied projects on the use of innovative agricultural practices.

3.2.1. Publication of the results of research and applied projects in the field of economic evaluation of the implementation of SSM, sustainable management of saline soils, soil organic carbon management.

EASP Secretariat

2020-2023 EASP Secretariat + Involved funds

3.2.2. Presentation of the best research results at EASP seminars, conferences and plenary assemblies.

2020-2023

3.2.3. Selection of best practices in soil cultivation, fertilizer management, methods for reducing soil erosion (methods, patents, innovative developments) by the analysis of WOCAT and other databases.

By December 2020

3.2.4. Transfer of knowledge to farmers and stakeholders through the organization of round tables, webinars, and the production of information materials.

3.3. Participation in activity on soil pollution

3.3.1. Participation in developing the guidelines for assessing, mapping, monitoring and reporting on soil pollution. 3.3.2. Participation in developing a database of good practices for managing and remediating soil pollution. Providing country-driven process in line with the UNEA3 resolution for the preparation of the regional part of the Global Assessment of the Status of Soil Pollution.

WG Pillar 3 2020-2023

3.4. Participation in the preparation of the Global Symposiums

3.4.1. Global Symposium on Soil Biodiversity FPs WG Pillar 3 WG Pillar 2

March 2020 Contribution of the host countries of the Symposiums

3.4.2. Global Symposium on Soil Salinity October 2020

3.4.3. Global Symposium on Soil Fertility 2021

3.5. Contribution to the Soil Atlas of Asia, developed by JRC and FAO

3.5.1. Development of a small-scale soil map of Central Asia. 3.5.2. Providing data for the Soil Atlas of Asia (soil data, images, etc.)

FPs and Institutes 2020-2022 JRC Funds (for publication and for meetings of the Editorial Board).

3.6. Contribution to updating of Soil Atlas of Europe, developed by JRC and FAO

3.6.1. Updating the soil maps of Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova. 3.6.2. Providing data for the Soil Atlas of Europe (soil data, images, etc.)

FPs and Institutes 2020-2022

Pillar 4: Enhance the quantity and quality of soil data and information: data collection (generation), analysis, validation, reporting, monitoring and integration with other disciplines.

4.1. Support for the establishment and operation of national soil data-centers including the basis of existing

4.1.1. Elaboration of the contact persons for creation and support of the data-centers.

4.1.2. The manifestation of initiatives from countries to organize

MSU, FPs

2020-2023 NA EASP Secretariat +

41

agrochemistry services. face-to-face and distance courses and seminars on the creation and operation of soil data centers (Moldova, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan). 4.1.3. Remote technical support for the data-centers.

Involved funds from countries

4.2. Contribution to the GloSIS Project

4.2.1. Elaboration of the responsible persons for each map from the each country.

FPs, GSP Secretariat

By the March of 2020

Funds of Institutions NA

4.2.2. Participation in the development of technical documentation and creation of the Global soil salinity map (GSSmap)

2020-2021

4.2.3. Participation in the development of technical documentation and assistance in defining regional input data for Global soil organic carbon sequestration (GSOCseq map)

2020

4.2.4. Participation in the development of technical documentation and creation of the global soil erosion maps (GSERmaps)

2020-2021

4.3.Creation of the national soil information systems (CountrySIS)

4.3.1. Develop an Armenian Soil Information System (ArSIS) based on legacy soil data for the Republic of Armenia. Digitization of soil maps of the country.

GSP Secretariat, Soil Science, Melioration and Agrochemistry Scientific Center named after H. Petrosyan

2020 GSP Secretariat Funds 200 000$

4.3.2. Develop an Ukranian Soil Information System (UkrSIS) based on legacy soil data for the Ukraine. Digitization of soil maps of the country by the 1:200000 scale using WRB.

GSP and EASP Secretariat, Institute for Soil Science and Agrochemistry named after A.N. Sokolovskiy

2020 GSP Secretariats Funds NA

Pillar 5: Harmonization of methods, measurements and indicators for the sustainable management and protection of soil resources.

5.1. Promotion of the international soil classification (WRB) as a parallel system of soil denomination through publications and training

5.1.1. Promoting of WRB through on-line trainings

EASP Secretariat 2020-2023 EASP Secretariat funds + internal sources of the institutions

5.1.2. Organization of workshops on WRB promotion in St. Petersburg on the basis of the V.V. Dokuchaev Central Museum of Soil Science and in other countries (to be defined).

WG Pillar 5

2020-2021

5.2. Creation of the digital soil descriptions and standards on national languages.

Development and filling of localized object models of soil descriptions in the joint standards (ISO 28258, Soil ML, EASP ML)

EASP Secretariats and data-centers’s contact persons

42

5.3. Participation in activities of Global Soil Laboratory Network (GLOSOLAN).

5.3.1. Holding EUROSOLAN workshops (the second - it was preliminary decided to organize in Tbilisi)

EASP and GSP Secretariats

October 2020 GSP Secretariat funds, 75 000$

5.3.2. Strengthening connection between laboratories in Europe and Asia

WG Pillar 5 2020-2023

5.3.3. Nomination of national reference laboratories WG Pillar 5, FPs January-March 2020

5.3.4. Ring test of samples provided by FAO WG Pillar 5 January -June 2020

5.3.5. Support activities for data harmonization WG Pillar 5, EASP and GSP Secretariats

2020

5.3.6. Creation of standard samples of reference materials for modal genetic soil types

WG Pillar 5 End of 2020, after GLOSOLAN meeting

43

Annex IV – EASP Working Groups

Country Pillar 1 Pillar 2 Pillar 3 Pillar 4 Pillar 5

Armenia Mr. Hunan Ghazaryan Mr. Davit Mejlumyan Mr. Samvel Sahakyan Mr. Gurgen

Eghiazaryan Mr. Vachagan Davtyan

Azerbaijan

Belarus

Georgia Mr. Gizo Gogichaishvili Mr. Giorgi Ghambashidze Mr. Giorgi Ghambashidze Mr. Giorgi

Ghambashidze Mr. Gizo Gogichaishvili

Kazakhstan

Kyrgyzstan Mr. Ermek Baibagyshov Mr. Nurudin Karabaev Mr. Sovetbek

Mamytkanov Mr. Askat Bayanov

Mr. Kutman Isaev Mr. Sovetbek Mamytkanov

Moldova Mr. Iurie Moșoi Ms. Tamara Leah Mr. Gheorghe Jigău Dr. Iurii Rozloga Ms Tamara Ceban

Russian Federation

Mr. Maxim Dabakhov

Ms. Olga Andreeva

Ms. Olga Chernova Mr. Sergei Chernyanskiy

Mr.Dmitry Rukhovich Mr. Yurii Litvinov

Ms. Elena Shamrikova

Tajikistan Mr.Bakhtovar Khudaikulov

Mr. Abduhamid Asrorov Mr. Sharif Aminov Ms. Nigorabegim Noyoftova

Ms. Gulniso Nekushoeva

Turkey Mr.Hakki Emrah Erdogan

Mr. Tarik Topcu Mr.Bulent Sonmez Dr.Yilmaz Ulku Ms.Yilmaz Ulku

Turkmenistan

Ukraine Mr. Vasyl Dehtiarov Mr. Serhii Chernyi Mr. Sviatoslav Baliuk Mr. Anatolii Balaiev Mr. Maxim Solokha

Uzbekistan Dr. Gulchekhra Khasanklhanova

Mr. Umid Abdullaev Ms. Laziza Gafurova, Ms. Tatyana Khamzina

Mr. Rustam Ibragimov

Ms. Inna Kojevnikova

Regional Chairs

Mr. Hakki E. Erdogan Turkey

Ms. Elena Sukhacheva Russian Federation

Mr. Svyatoslav Baliuk Ukraine

Mr. Iurii Rozloga Moldova

Mr.Hukmatullo Ahmadov Tajikistan

Responsible from the EASP

Secretariat Mr. Alexey Sorokin Ms. Anna Kontoboytseva Mr. Maria Konyushkova Mr. Oleg Golozubov Ms. Olga Yakimenko

44

Annex V – Draft contents of the book

«Sustainable soil management in the Eurasian region»

Outline Volume Authors

I. Introduction Concept/definitions of soil quality and sustainable soil management (SSM), soil sustainability and conservation, attributes and characteristics, objectives, role and value of contribution publications for food security (FS) and land degradation neutrality (LDN) in the region

2000-3000 words

S.Baliuk P.Krasilnikov I.Mosoi G.Khasankhanova

II. Driving forces of soil degradation

3000-6000 words

2.1. Growth of consumption The article considers the demographic factor, which is especially relevant in Central Asia, the issues of food security and balanced nutrition, the growth of consumption of meat and dairy products, the rate on agriculture as a source of income from exports

1000-2000 words

A.Sorokin

2.2. Climate change The positive and negative influences of regional climate changes are considered: warming without strong drought (production potential increasing) and aridization with desertification taking into account the frequency of extreme weather events in Eurasia

1000-2000 words

D.Karelin I. Vasenev

2.3. Urbanization and formation of rural agglomerations The role of urban settlements formation in changing the ratio of agricultural producers and consumers is shown. It is indicated that the growth of urbanization leads to the withdrawal of the best land from circulation

1000-2000 words

T.Prokofieva V. Vasenev

III. Causes of soil degradation

5000-10000 words

It is proposed to include 3-4 authors from subregions

3.1. Land-use change in different farming systems Deforestation, plowing of steppes, transfer of natural grassland ecosystems and woodlands to pastures are considered together with current changes in farming systems, environmental infrastructure and crop rotation

1000-2000 words

S.Baliuk N.Miroshnichenko V.Solovey I. Vasenev

3.2. Unsustainable land use 3.2.1. Violations of rules and technologies of agriculture The use of monoculture and irrational crop rotations, insufficient fertilization, violation of tillage technology, lack of erosion control measures, etc. are considered 3.2.2. Excessively intensive agriculture Excessive application of pesticides, fertilizers, the use of heavy machinery, overgrazing, etc.

2000-4000 words

S.Baliuk I.Plisco N.Miroshnichenko V.Kolyada

3.3. Impact of industry, transport and urban waste The influence of technogenic pollution and littering of productive soils as a result of the impact of technogenic sources not related to agriculture is considered

1000-2000 words

А.Fateev N.Miroshnichenko

3.4. Changes in hydrology and water regime Discusses the negative effect of decreasing and increasing groundwater levels, changes in water-regime, flooding of soils, etc.

1000-2000 words

G.Khasankhanova S.Baliuk R. Truskavetski Include hydrologists from Russia

IV. Current state and management of soil resources in the Eurasian 5000-8000 P.Krasilnikov

45

region words G.Khasankhanova

4.1. Soil cover of the Eurasian region as an object of management Climate, vegetation, dominant soil types, land use/land cover, agro-ecological zones, soil fertility status

1000-2000 words

М.Konyushkova V.Solovey

4.2. Systems of management Dominant economic systems in the subregions of the Eurasian region (for example, deserts, semi-deserts, flat areas including flood plains, foothills, low mountains, etc. on precipitation, crops, types of management)

1000-2000 words

P.Krasilnikov G.Khasankhanova Include authors from Russia, South Caucasus, Central Asia

4.3. Soil degradation in Eurasian region 4.3.1. Nutrients imbalance 4.3.2. Loss of organic carbon and increased СО2 emissions 4.3.3. The decline of biodiversity

4.3.4. Water and wind erosion 4.3.5. Desertification and physical degradation 4.3.6. Soil sealing 4.3.7. Unsettled water regime 4.3.8. Natural and anthropogenic salinization, alkalinization and acidification 4.3.9. Technogenic pollution 4.3.10. Distribution and vulnerability of agriculture and water resources, target groups and vulnerable regions

3000-4000 words

I.Mosoi А.Saparov L.Gafurova S.Baliuk А.Fateev Include authors from Russia, South Caucasus, Central Asia

V. Impact of soil degradation on society Biophysical impacts, socio-economic and environmental, and expected changes as a result of climate change

2000-4000 words

5.1. Ecosystem services related to soils and their loss through degradation Loss of ecosystem services due to soil degradation, including production services, biodiversity maintenance services, water filtration, carbon sequestration, etc., are considered.

1000-2000 words

S.Baliuk E.Drozd Include authors from Russia, South Caucasus, Central Asia

5.2. Economics of land degradation in the region Examples (cases) of sustainable and unsustainable land use in the region, in particular irrigated soils, pastures, monocultures or heavy machinery use and alternative land use from the point of view of the economics of land degradation for various zones and countries are considered.

1000-2000 words

A.Sorokin А.Kucher Include authors from Russia, South Caucasus, Central Asia

VI. Society responses In Chapter 6, it is desirable to reflect the current policies and plans of all countries in the Eurasian region. Proposal to prepare a summary table with a list of national plans, programs that are adopted in the EA countries of the region related to the fight against desertification, land degradation and drought (DLDD) and SSM to achieve land degradation neutrality (LDN) and the sustainable development goals.

8000-12000 words

Focal Points

6.1. Sustainable land management policies, institutions and legal framework 6.1.1. Sustainable soil management policy and institutional and legal framework 6.1.2. National and regional programmes and action plans to support the achievement of LDN goals (with a focus on improving soil fertility and reclamation, expanding innovative approaches, technologies and practices

2000-3000 words

G.Khasankhanova А. Chervan А.Kucher T.Laktionova S.Baliuk M.Zakharova

46

of SSM) 6.1.3. Soil and land resources database, including online land use and fertilizer management systems 6.1.4. Monitoring (cadastre, conditioning of lands, inventory, certification, valuation)

6.2. Scientific maintenance 6.2.1. Methodological guidelines, recommendations and manuals on management and use of saline soils, knowledge products and training modules for target groups, etc. 6.2.2. Research on soil fertility management, mitigation of salinization and soil conservation, integrated catchment management, etc. 6.2.3. Environmental assessment of climate change impacts on soil quality and productivity and agroecosystem services. 6.2.4. Information and technology support through agroecological modeling and decision support system developing for land-use agroecological optimizing

Include authors from Russia, Belorussia, South Caucasus, Central Asia I. Vasenev

6.3. Components of a sustainable soil management system Management of nutrient regime of soils Reducing soil erosion Control of soil salinization Agriculture management Water management Pollution control and soil remediation

2000-3000 words

S.Baliuk K.Kulov N.Miroshnichenko V.Kolyada А.Fateev M. Romashchenko

6.4. Improving soil management and use: successful results and lessons learned in the EA region Land-use planning Watershed management of small rivers Environmental approaches to sustainable land use Reclamation and restoration of degraded soils Climate-sustainable management

3000-4000 words

T.Trifonova R. Truskavetski

6.5. Advisory support and extension service to enhance sustainable soil management: - Training courses and trainings for farmers and local communities using INRMFFS, PLUD approaches and other FAO tools - Academic courses and extension services at universities and colleges (experience of Russia, Kazakhstan) - Restoration and reclamation of degraded soils (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Russia, Uzbekistan, etc.) - Strengthening the potential of human resources and strengthening the capacity of soil institutions (Kazakhstan, etc.)

1000-2000 words

H. Ahmadov S.Baliuk A.Levin

VII. Research and development priorities - development of climate sustainable and innovative management systems - approaches and methods of dissemination/replication of SSM technologies and integration into global knowledge bases WOCAT, ISRIC etc. (Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Russia) - the transfer of traditional technologies suitable to local conditions - generation of GIS-based information on land and soil fertility regulation - development of capacity for forecasting and transfer of scientific results in the practice of planning and replication on a large scale

2000-3000 words

S.Baliuk P.Krasilnikov I.Mosoi G.Khasankhanova

List of references

25000-46000 words /125000-230000 characters /3-6 “author sheets”